Dr. Forbush Thinks

When I made the transition from the University world to the Industrial world I was introduced to the concept of the “trade show.” The idea with a trade show is to gather the key players in your industry or area and sell each other your products. In academia there is a similar concept called the conference. An academic conference does the same thing as a trade show in that it gathers all the key players into one location. However, the academic conference is based on the premise that everyone is sharing their ideas. The truth of the matter here is that at an academic conference everyone is “selling” their ideas.

Human nature works the same in both the academic and industrial worlds. People like what they are used to using. They would like to continue to do what they are used to doing with the exception that they might like to do it a little faster and a little more efficiently. Most people are not willing to jump on the band wagon of any new technology without proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that the new way is worth the trouble of changing.

When I joined EDC we had a monopoly on the equipment that we made. The premise of sticking with what you know worked very well for our company. When the occasional player tried to break into the market we could easily introduce something into our product to compete with any potential advantage that might challenge us. Customers tended to stick with what they already knew - namely our product.

With the success of our company we made several attempts to expand our business. In order to expand we needed to create a new product using a new technology. In doing so we normally ran into the problem of coming up against established products and trying to overcome that inertia from the other side. In one case we came up with several improvements on the existing technology in the semiconductor industry. However, breaking into the semiconductor industry proved to be extremely difficult and we fell back on plan B, sell the technology to someone already established in the semiconductor industry.

The point of all this introduction is meant to establish the need for trade shows and conferences. When you get together with people in the field conversations begin and mature. Walking the trade show educates and informs. Trade shows bring customers to venders, but it also brings people and ideas together.

As we developed our biotech equipment we needed a way to get our product out into the public. To us it seemed liked people would just “need” our equipment once they saw what it could do. How could anyone prefer the “old” technology when we had this “new” technology that was so much better? The answer of course was that the old technology worked adequately for most applications being done at the time and the potential customers weren’t so sure about the new technology. Most people were unprepared to look a couple of years down the road to the new applications, mainly because they hadn’t been thought of yet.

Our job was to show potential customers how wonderful our product is. This had to be done with the standard tests that our customers use to verify that their current equipment works. In other words, in order to break into an existing market we needed to make our equipment do the same job that the current equipment was doing. People weren’t prepared to redesign everything and put our equipment into the new setup. And, the best place to learn what the current customers think about “new” equipment is a trade show.

In the biotech industry trade shows and conferences are merged into one thing. There are talks and presentations as well as booths for people in “the industry.” This means that you need to make your point academically as well as economically. A new technology needs to pass “peer review.” In other words, your product will only be accepted if the majority of the people in the community agree that the technology is worthy. And so, even though scientists don’t like to admit it - social relationships play a role in the industry.

Well, EDC BioSystems first presented our technology at this trade show about five years ago. And, over those five years we have presented our argument to the community every year since. And, slowly the community has warmed to acoustic dispensing and EDC BioSystems as a company. Hence, every year in this decade I have made that trip to the desert, either for learning about the industry or for presenting our equipment. And, always to build those important business relationships.

This year the conference/trade show was held on Sunday, Monday and Tuesday. I flew in Sunday and left Tuesday afternoon. There are certain rituals that have been established over the years of attending trade shows. One of those rituals is the “business dinner.” Other rituals are “walking the show,” “working the booth,” “scoping the competition,” “meeting and greeting old friends,” “reading the posters,” and “finding the golden nugget.”

These rituals have gradually evolved by trial and error. The rituals need not be performed in any specific order, although they all do need to be done during the show. Some are performed throughout the duration of the show, while others are done once and abandoned. Each of these rituals have social interactions involved and the rituals foster social relationships.

With all of these rituals to follow there is hardly any time to do anything on your own. Well, there is one personal ritual that I have begun in recent years. I get up early and go for a run. I did this for the first time three years ago. Of course whenever one is in a strange city it isn’t that easy to know the best places to run. So, on my first trip I just took off running down the street at 5:30 in the morning. This first run wasn’t an ideal run, mainly because I ran out into the desert before the sun had risen. It was dark and I had no idea where I should go. I had looked at a map before hand, and it seemed that I had a good trail to follow, but there weren’t any sidewalks and it was bloody dark. Well, on subsequent runs I found better and better places to run. And, I gradually began my run a bit later so that I could run as the sun came up over the desert. This is how these rituals evolve.

This year I did the same thing. I woke up and began my run at 7:00 AM. I thought that I might try something a little different. On the last day of the show last year I found out that there were trails on the mountains that surround Palm Springs. These steep rock piles that surround Palm Springs shoot up about 3000 feet into the sky and influence the desert climate that has people returning year after year. These naked rock piles have very little vegetation because of the lack of rainfall and consistent 100+ degrees weather most of the year. In the winter the weather is much more hospitable. At 6:30 AM I took off toward the mountain to the west of the city. The base of the mountain was about a mile from my hotel, but I had no idea where the paths began. I thought that I might just run along the foot of the mountain and discover where the path might begin.

As I ran the mile toward the base of the mountain I saw a fellow runner heading in the same direction. Then I saw a couple of runners running in the opposite direction. I sensed that I might be going the right way. As followed the runner ahead of me I saw him scramble up to a road that ran along the base of the mountain but at about 10 or 15 feet up the side of the mountain. I followed him up to the road, and then up further to a sandy path that seamed to climb further up the side of the mountain. I followed him as he ran up the side of the mountain. Running up hill requires a bit more effort than running on flat ground, but if one slows down one, then one can still find a good pace based on effort. Of course the guy that I began to follow was faster than I was, so he was soon out of sight somewhere ahead of me on the path.

I continued to follow the path up the mountain. I traveled at a good pace, breathing heavy on the steepest sections of the path. As I climbed I saw a beautiful city stretched out before me. As I climbed I saw that the trail was actually marked with little spots of white paint on rocks. After about 25 minutes I emerged at the top of this small mountain. It was the first foothill, with taller ones directly behind it. I estimated that I had climbed about 1500 feet and to my surprise there were six very sturdy picnic tables placed at the top of this climb. Just as I emerged I saw the runner that I had followed up the mountain. For the first time I noticed that he was about ten years older than I am. He complimented me on being in “good” shape. He said that he was Swiss, so of course he was used to doing this. Then he took off running back down the mountain.

Been there, done that! I circled the picnic tables and then I also took off running back down the mountain, and back to my hotel. The total round trip was about 55 minutes - a good workout for the day.

The next day I decided to do the same run, but I thought that I might explore the top of the mountain a bit before a returned down again. I also decided to leave a few minutes earlier in order to catch the sunrise over the city as I climbed the mountain. And, I discovered a loop that ran around the mountaintop. And, on the way down I ran into the same guy I had followed up the mountain the day before. I had realized that he was also in town to go to the same trade show. Finally as I was running down the mountain I passed another runner who asked me if I knew how to find another path that lead to the south end of Palm Springs. That was the first that I had heard of it. But I guess next year I will look for it as this running ritual continues to evolve.

I have been extremely busy the last few days. And, last week I was on vacation, which meant that I dropped everything in order to do twice as much this week. At least, that’s how it feels as this week is beginning to come to an end. Busy in the current American culture means that we have our time completely occupied from waking in the morning until sleeping in the evening. However, all of those activities are still subject to a “priority check.” I mean, I am actually busy all the time without regard for what else is demanding of my time and attention. Even while I was on vacation I was busy. It was just that I found the time to place self interest above my employer’s interest in my time. While I was on vacation I was able to occupy my time from the time I woke up until the time I went to sleep. The only difference was the priority of the things I found to occupy my time and attention.

So, what I was trying to say was that I was busy with priorities other than writing for the last few weeks. While I was on vacation I left my laptop at home, in order to insure that I focused on life experience. One important thing to remember as a writer is to have some life experience in order to write about life experience. It could become too easy to create situations artificially in order to live a scripted experience in order to write about it. Of course I know that the bloggers that I know would never do that. However, I have heard stories that these people do exist.

While I drive my number one priority is to pay attention to the road and traffic around me. But, my next priority is to listen to the radio and learn what the community is saying. While I was listening to the radio I heard a couple of interesting stories about food and religion that oddly enough seem to intersect in a strange way.

The food stories tended to be about how American’s have so much food that the food producers have invented ways to make people buy their cheap food. They make sugar and sweeteners out of corn (high fructose corn syrup) at one forth the cost of other sweeteners. America produces more than 4000 calories of food per person per day, and we only need 2000 or less for a healthy diet. The producers however would like us to buy that extra 2000 calories as well.

Well, the food industry has no self interest in limiting America’s consumption of food. The free market demands reward for consumption. But, massive consumption of food is not in the best interest of society, mainly because of health issues. Market forces may create efficient economics, but unfortunately the assumption is that society wins if every person has more. Market forces have no limits, and if everyone has more than they need, then there is no way to protect society from over-consumption.

If we look at the health side of the equation, maybe there is a way that market forces could regulate the ills of society. Over-consumption of food results in obesity, high blood pressure, heart disease, high cholesterol and diabetes to name a few issues. Over-consumption of food results in more business for the health industry. The health industry sells more drugs and procedures to aid in lowering cholesterol, controlling blood sugar, and reducing weight. The bigger the over-consumption problem, the more money the health industry pulls down. And, in addition to the official health industry there are many people who profit from this issue by selling diet books, and alternative medicines. And, the information in these diet books is recycled back into the food market in order to sell more food.

The conclusion is that everyone knows that they should eat less and healthier food, and exercise more. But, from all of the marketing in our society all we see is buy more unhealthy food because it will make us happy. The health industry tells us that we can’t possible succeed in this futile effort, so we need to buy drugs and diet aids to help us overcome our shortcomings as humans.

Well, oddly enough, some religions offer similar messages. Religions seem to be divided into two broad groups. All religions tend to claim to have some insight into the big picture and offer us understanding of our purpose here on Earth. One group claims to have exclusive authority and demand that everyone needs to adhere to those beliefs in order to find the answers. The other group believes that there are universal values such as love and compassion that are needed to obtain these answers and are willing to accept a wide variety of religions that share these common values.

These two groups tend to have different approaches in the religious market place. The first group believes that the same marketing strategy offered by the food producers is the key. More of my religion is good less of other religions is good. Glitzy marketing campaigns and propaganda are the key to building the world in this vision. Telling people to buy religious books, icons, and philosophies are the key to making one religion dominant and therefore the winning religion.

The second group is different than the first group in that the final outcome is a world where certain religious values are the goals. If religions preach about love and compassion then a world with more love and compassion will result. It doesn’t matter if Jesus, Mohammed or Buddha tell us the importance of this love and compassion. The benefit of more love and compassion benefits society, even if it doesn’t benefit one particular religion. And, that is how these two things, food and religion, are so similar.

If we leave religion to market forces, then the religion that advertises the most becomes the more dominate religion. It doesn’t matter much about how much love and compassion they intend to inject into our society. So, this massive marketing of religion hurts the quality of the religion that we are offered. Similarly, if we leave food to the market forces, then the more food we consume the better the food producers make out. It doesn’t matter whether maximum food consumption is good for our society. Maximum food consumption hurts our society through it cost in our health care system. And, it even hurts our society in the quality of the food we get.

Quality was once believed to be driven by market forces. But, as Bill Gates showed us, marketing can overcome defects in quality. And, the food industry is no exception. Cherries, apples, tomatoes, and strawberries have all been bread to be massively produced without regard for flavor. The consumer had little choice in this evolution, because of the cost differences of massively produced varieties as compared to the flavorful but delicate varieties. So, what is the real quality we look for in food? Is it the flavor, or the convenience? What do we lose in this market driven model?

Similarly, the quality in religion has been replaced with the ability to have quick answers without contemplation. There are Bibles with answers to commonly asked questions written in alternate colored text. Does this enhance the religious experience, or does it take the work of contemplation out of the equation? Do these religions give us the values in the end, or do they give us a list of rules that are derived from someone’s values that were created long ago in the context of a different world? What do we lose in this conversion?

So, in the end the way our food has evolved and the way our religions have evolved we are losing the essence, purpose, flavor, meaning and details that make our experiences special.





-----------------------------------------------------





Don't forget what Stephen Colbert said, "Reality has a well-known liberal bias."


Cross Posted @ Bring It On, tblog, Blogger and BlogSpirit



Reflection

Yesterday I listened to a talk given by Chris Anderson, the author of the book, “The Long Tail.” He also has a blog over @ The Long Tail.

The idea behind his book is quite simple, yet it is also quite eye opening. Basically Chris tells us that all markets can be described as a power curve. OK, the mathematicians out there know what I’m talking about, but the rest of you are lost. So, imagine a piece of graph paper with an x and a y axis. The x-axis runs across the bottom of the graph and it describes items of different types arranged in order of popularity. The items to the left are the most popular and the items to the right are the least popular. Now, imagine the y-axis representing sales of those items. Obviously the most popular items sells the most and it will be plotted as the highest on the y-axis. So, now if you plot the points on the graph you should find that all the items lie on a curve that has a very long tail to the right.

If you are still following me, then I can assume that the math I’ve already described wasn’t to complicated so I’ll go on assuming that it isn’t.

The point that Chris makes is that in the last century mass marketing has concentrated on the few items to the left hand side of the graph and it has ignored the items to the right hand side of the graph, even though 80% of the potential market is ignored while 20% of the market is pushed with unrelenting marketing and advertising. This brings up many questions, including: “why is so much marketing money wasted on pushing items that are already popular?” It obviously has to do with what is desired by the business side of the equation, rather than what is desired for the customer side of the equation. The market shape described by Chris is not just hypothetical, it has been observed by the sales of music. The thousands of titles that are now available on line represent a market that is unencumbered by distribution of rare titles. And what is observed is a power curve with a very long tail.

One can imagine that the sales of 1000 individual rare one of type songs costs the same as selling 1000 copies of the most popular title. In the “old days” before the Internet, however it would have been difficult to know where to ship a single copy of some rare song so that the person who wants it would be able to find it on the self of the record store that he frequented. So, the idea of matching a person to a rare infrequently desired item is much easier.

Although music was the example that Chris used, this idea applies to all markets. Amazon.com showed us this with books, and E-Bay shows us this with the diversity of matching even rarer more random types of items. This long tail is the future and many new companies know this and they are acting on their own ideas related to targeting this long tail.

The key to using this information is the method needed to match the people to the items in the long tail. If we think of a plot of “all items transacted” we would start with the most popular item that is bought and sold. I have no idea what it is, but surely someone does. Maybe it is waste. Out in the tail there are cupcakes and coffeecakes sold once a year at the school Christmas fundraiser. Even further out there are even rarer transactions. If someone wants to make money out on the tail there needs to be a way to collect the things together in some way so that one can sell a lot of these rare items. For example, someone could start a business that specializes in selling home baked goods. They could collect a large number of potential bakers together online and they would submit web pages describing their food. The potential business would be a way to match all of these potential bakers with those that appreciate home baked food shipped overnight by FedEx or some other overnight shipping company.

Imagine the problems solved by the collection of all of these potential bakers. A person is not limited to one person or another person, but they could select from thousands of potential dishes or deserts. The person who cooks the meal no longer needs to advertise or search for business. Instead they rely on getting a hit on their item advertised at a place where people who are looking for food are shopping. Assuming that the business creator works out the shipping problem, then this model could offer unlimited diversity of food to a potential customer. Of course this model might not work for all food from anywhere around the world, but it is true that it increases the diversity available to the people that it can reach.

Now, this curve is not static. Items become popular and they become less desirable. This happens for various reasons. Some items just might be better than all other similar items. Word of mouth spreads this information, and the best item is sought by the majority of those looking for that type of item. Another way that an item becomes popular is by forced marketing where an item is advertised so much that people are unaware of any similar items in the market. People who need that type of item will select the only item they believe to be available fitting the desired class.

The point here is that there will be a large number of new potential business opportunities that are available looking for people to start new businesses. The idea is to create new ways to get diverse goods aggregated into groups that people will be able to search for particular rare items. There might be an opportunity for an online model train scenery supplier that collects artists together that will produce specialized pieces on demand. Or, it might be political blogs that aggregate all of the best writing on particular ideologically specific areas. Oh, I guess that’s been done already. Well, there are still phrenology and numerology aggregates that don’t exist yet.

:-}



-----------------------------------------------------





Don't forget what Stephen Colbert said, "Reality has a well-known liberal bias."


Cross Posted @ Bring It On, tblog, Blogger and BlogSpirit



Politics

George W Bush went out on a limb last night and told us that the US had it in its technological know how to develop alternative fuels. America needs these alternative fuels because we are addicted to oil. This is funny, really funny. Wasn’t it 30 years ago when the environmentalists tried to get the government to create incentives for these types of programs? In 30 years we would certainly have already moved over to using hydrogen instead of oil to power not only cars but power plants and homes. Solar and nuclear energy would be used to store the energy in the form of hydrogen. We wouldn’t have created some percentage of the green house gasses that we already have, and we wouldn’t create some amount of the future ones either. Global Warming would have been put into check.

But, the environmentalists were laughed off the world stage and the world got a bit dirtier and hotter. But, now that George W Bush has declared that America is addicted to Oil things will change. After all, America is a technological leader and we will develop some new technology very soon. And, perhaps in twenty years or so we will be able to get the new fuel into the American infrastructure with private companies that will see a profit in this.

Well, too bad for America, because Brazil has already done this. Over 70% of Brazils cars can run on ethanol. Brazil worked with Ford to develop cars that can work on both ethanol and gasoline by virtue of a simple switch. And Brazil has a production and distribution system for creating and producing ethanol fuel. Brazil has worked the bugs out of the system. So, when gasoline costs more than ethanol then ethanol sales go up; and when ethanol is more expensive than ethanol then gasoline sales go up. The fuels are being tied together and the alternative fuels will become an alternative for the world.

So, perhaps it isn’t about America’s addition to oil that Bush cares about. Maybe Bush sees the dominance of the US oil cartel loosing more leverage. If Bush gives money to his oil buddies for them to do alternative fuels research they will simply copy the Brazilian example and put ethanol pumps at every American service station before new entrepreneurs are able to do the same thing more quickly using someone else’s capital. Oil companies aren’t stupid and they know that they could loose 50% of the market share if they don’t jump on the bandwagon quickly. And if gasoline continues to rise, as it is forecast, then alternative fuel could become even more attractive. Oil companies could loose even more market share.

So, this has nothing to do with the environment or care for our planet. In fact, burning ethanol still puts carbon dioxide into the air, but it’s carbon dioxide that has already been there and absorbed by the corn that is grown to make the ethanol. Looking at the system we still get smog in our cities, but it isn’t old smog from that was locked away, but new smog that was in the air last year.

But I still wonder, since America is addicted to oil and the SUV drivers waste more oil than any other drivers. And, addition to anything is considered a sin. And, SUV owners seem to be largely Republicans judging by all the W sticks and yellow ribbons I see on the backs of these vehicles. Given all that, can we finally call these idiots un-American?

Just wondering! But, there is hope that these American who revere George W Bush as if he were God will finally conserve some fuel. Perhaps only drive their SUVs off road like God intended them to be driven. Perhaps they will begin to think of the rest of us as we choke on their inordinate amount of exhaust, and they take up the neighboring parking spaces by virtue of the width of their car. Perhaps they’ll say, “Hey George won’t like if I drive my SUV, better sell it.” There is just so much to be optimistic about our new environment leader.




Environment,Gasoline,Alternative Fuels,Ethanol,Politics

Back in ’02 I received some money. Of course the details aren’t as simple as that cliché statement, but for this blog that’s all that really matters. I invested this money in a lot of different things, because anyone knows that diversification in the key to holding on to your money. But, taking risk is also part of the American culture and the capitalist way of life. So, I decided to risk a portion of it in riskier but potentially more profitable ventures.

I began to think about the different industries in general, and I tried to imagine which industries were bound to do well over the next twenty years. I was investing for the long term, so I didn’t and still don’t care about the day to day value of the stocks, but it is always nice to see the entire portfolio doing well. Back in ’02 I thought that huge progress was bound to be made in biotechnology at least in the next twenty years. Actually I still think that this is true, but like the high tech stock boom not all biotech companies are the same. I could have bought a mutual fund that concentrates on the biotech sector, but I thought that I’d like to invest in a few biotech companies that I liked. I picked several, but I will write about three of them today.

The three companies I’d like to discuss are Johnson and Johnson, Merck and Vertex. Johnson and Johnson is a big old company that isn’t likely to go anywhere very soon. They are diversified into many areas in addition to drugs. They are like the IBM of the biotech sector. It isn’t going to double your money and it isn’t going to loose your money either. Johnson and Johnson is a blue chip company that pays dividends to its shareholders. Merck is a newer company, they were founded in 1890 and it has a certain company way of doing things. They seem to be a bit more interested in research, and they are willing to risk money to do that research. I look at Merck like the Hewlet Packard of the pharmaceutical world. Vertex is a new company that has had some early success. If they play their cards right they will be able to reinvest their profits and make their company grow to the size of Merck or Johnson and Johnson. But, if they blow all their cash and they don’t strike paydirt then they will end up packing their bags and going home. Or, maybe they’ll go to work for Merck or Johnson and Johnson.

So, I bought a piece of each of these companies. At the end of 2002 Merck and Johnson and Johnson shares were selling for roughly the same price, about $60.00 a share. I bought 100 shares each. Vertex was selling for roughly $20.00 a share, so I bought 300 shares. Basically I invested $6,000 in each company believing that they were all good companies and over time they would all do reasonably well.

Of course no one can predict what will happen over time. Fluctuations in the market don’t really matter much when we are thinking about twenty years in the future. The main thing is to have belief that the companies you own will do the best they can to make a profit and be successful. That’s right, when you buy stock you become an owner in the company and you need to expect that it will do well. When you loose faith in a company, then its time to sell the stock and put the money in a company that you can have faith in. Faith in a company isn’t always reflected in the stock price. The stock price reflects the faith that other people have in the company, not you. If they loose their faith, then they can sell their stock. It only means that you can buy more of it at a cheaper price.

By the end of 2003 the price of Vertex stock had fallen to $13.00 a share from the $20.00 I had bought it at. But I still thought that Vertex was a good company, so I bought 100 more shares at the lower price. I was thinking that in twenty years this little drop in price is going to look like a little blip, the stock will rebound. By the end of 2003 Merck stock had fallen to $45.00 a share, so I bought 100 more shares at this discount price. Johnson and Johnson had fallen, but not quite as much so I didn’t think that the stock was cheap enough to suggest that I buy more. The point is that the value of the stock is relative to the price of all valuable stocks, and also to the price of currency and a ton of other factors. This is why it is difficult to know when a stock is cheap enough to merit purchasing, so one must really believe in the company. Then again belief in a company can also cause you to chase a company into the ground as it goes up in flames. But, that is the risk part of the whole capitalist ideology.

The Viox scandal has had its effect on the price of Merck stock. When the news of Viox possibly causing heart attacks in users of the drug came to light and lawsuits were filed the price of Merck stock sank to around $30.00 a share. As far as Merck goes I lost 50% on the first 100 shares that I bought and I lost another %33 percent on the second 100 shares that I bought. So, I bought another 175 shares at $30.00 a share in 2004. The price hasn’t rebounded much, but it hasn’t dropped either. If Merck is successful in its lawsuits the price will surely go back up to the $45.00 per share level. Also, Merck has a large team of crack researchers working on the next new drug that will revolutionize the health care industry.

Similarly, when Vertex fell to $8.00 a share I bought 500 more shares. Perhaps I had a death wish, or gambler’s fever but I had faith in the company. Vertex reorganized itself and sold off some of its holdings.

And, now at the beginning of 2006 I have begun to look through the old portfolio just to see what is happening. Stock is for the future, so it doesn’t make sense to ponder it continually. But every once in a while it pays to examine the pros and cons of the companies I own. The main question is, are they working for me, or is there another company that could be doing a better job.

Well, as of today the Johnson and Johnson stock is basically where I bought it. I did earn dividends on the stock which amounted to about $360.00 which was worth about 2% per year. The stock price is $62.00; therefore the total stock is worth $6200. Adding the dividends to the current value my total investment is now worth roughly $6560 and I made 9% over the three years that I have held the stock. That isn’t great if you compare it to the Dow Jones or the S&P 500 that is up roughly 20% over the same time, but its better than loosing the money.

Talking about loosing the money, the Merck stock is currently at roughly $33.00 a share and I have lost nearly $4,000 including the dividends paid and the slight rebound in price and the purchase of the cheaper stock.

But, then again the riskiest stock finally paid off. Vertex is now selling for about $30.00 per share. That means that the stock I bought at $8, $13 and even $20 are all worth $30. So, I ended up making $15,000 on this company, which makes up for the $4000 I lost on Merck. So, the question becomes, “Do I own too much Vertex stock?” Maybe I should sell some. Since Vertex was listed as one of the top five mid-cap companies for 2005, there is little expectation that they will repeat this in 2006.

The real point to this whole post is that investing for twenty years down the road still requires some effort if one wants to make a killing in the market. But, the average person who doesn’t want to think about his investments every day should buy stock in companies that they understand and believe in, then they will know what to do as time goes on.