In this episode, we talk to world renown author, Roger Lowenstein. Our discussion starts with a study of Warren Buffett and ends with a review of the Federal Reserve. Roger has published six books, and three have become New York Times Bestsellers.
In this episode, you’ll learn
- The one thing that people don’t know about Warren Buffett?
- Why Charlie Munger has made Warren Buffett’s more fun, but perhaps not more prosperous
- Why we have the same conversation about Central Banks as we did 100 years ago
- Ask the Investors: What is the future of cryptocurrencies?
Get The Investor’s Podcast blog posts and podcast episode updates on your Facebook feed by liking We Study Billionaires.
Podcast Transcript and Summary
Preston Pysh: All right how’s everyone doing out there, Preston Pysh with you from Bel Air, Maryland and Stig Broderson from Seoul, South Korea. And today, like we said in the introduction, we have Roger Lowenstein with us and we’re so excited to have you here Roger. Thank you so much for taking time out of your busy day to be with us.
Roger Rowenstein: [00:01:25] It’s my pleasure to be here.
Preston: [00:01:26] So Roger, you’re the biggest authority that I found in writing about Buffett and Stig and I have both read your book, Buffett: The Making of an American Capitalist. And I can personally say this is my favorite biography on Buffett. So I’m curious just as a fan of your writing, talk to us about Warren Buffett. What got you so interested in him to write an entire book? And I mean you really covered him in this book. What captivated your attention to do that?
Roger: [00:01:53] You know, I had followed him since, it’s hard to remember now, but late 70s, early 80s. We owned a little bit of his stock in the family and used to get his annual reports and read them with, you know a whole lot of interest, and frankly admiration. And of course we weren’t ignorant of the fact that his stocks seemed to be rising. You know we’d have discussions around the kitchen table, gee it’s 200 bucks a share, can it go higher? It’s 400 dollars, should we hang on? And of course his wisdom was always that it’s not the sticker price, it’s the intrinsic value of the business, and the per share value and the number itself is just a number. In the late 70s, I got a job at The Wall Street Journal as a reporter, came out of school, and by the late 1980s I was actually writing the Heard on the Street column for The Wall Street Journal. And that’s the column where they, at least in my day, size up a stock, a traded security every day and get from an analyst to tell you that it was either too expensive and advise your readers to sell it or that it was cheap and they ought to a pilot and buy it. And it struck me that the interviews that I was getting and the reasons from these analysts were so short term. And they fell so far short of the wisdom and understanding of markets that I was getting each year in the annual reports from Buffett. And I thought you know, he really had a story to tell the American investing public. This is in the very early 90s, Buffett was not well-known then outside of Wall Street. But within Wall Street, he was certainly recognized, already the greatest investor of our generation. And then in 1991 there was a scandal at a Wall Street firm, guess I’ve heard that one or two times since, from a Salomon Brothers. And John Gutfreund, who ran the firm, was I guess a friend of Buffett’s and Buffett had owned a little bit of the preferred stock in the Salomons. Gutfreund called Buffett up, you know I’m stepping down. Gutfreund hadn’t handled the scandal well and wasn’t implicated, so Buffett ends up running this Wall Street firm. There was a lot of headlines about you know, Omaha boy goes to evil caverns of Wall Street, and suddenly I realize that this guy who I knew a lot about, at least you know something about, is very much in the news. So I took that would be a very good trigger to pitch a book and write it.
Preston: [00:04:18] Wow. So I’m curious. You found him in the 70s, which is you know that’s kind of unheard of for people that are huge Buffett fans like myself to find him so early in the career. Was it just serendipity? What was it that you were able to find him so early?
Roger: [00:04:34] We were neighbors you know, my folks and clearly my father, we were neighbors of the guy named Jerry Orients who had gone to school with Buffett at Penn. And Jerry used to tell my father he ought to invest with him, and you know I think dad would ask him, what else? And Jerry would basically say you don’t need anything else, just give it all to Warren. Dad also, he was a lawyer for a part of his career had a couple of interchanges with Buffett actually on the other side of the deal and try to persuade his client that the businesses that Warren was selling was probably not a business you wanted to buy. But Warren is a very good salesman, and he got the soft sell down to a T, and I think Dad came away wishing he had gone on the other side of the table with Warren. So there were a few points of contact.
Preston: [00:05:20] Wow that is so cool. You’re exactly right, he is such a soft seller. He’s so delicate in the way that he makes the person feel like they have an option, but deep down inside you know he’s totally leading them in the exact way that he wants them to go. It’s hilarious.
Roger: [00:05:35] Yeah. And by the way, I’d advise people with an idea to pitch to Warren or maybe they want him to contribute to their golf charity or something: the soft sell doesn’t work with him. These conversations where you make pleasantries for five minutes and then say, “Hey Warren I was thinking it would be great to have you on the board.” You know, he sees these things coming, it’s like he can see around the corner. And he’s unique in that things he does are precisely the things he wants to do not the things that other people are groomed to do. But no approach is going to work with him better than just a direct approach. Take 30 seconds if you get him on the phone and ask him to do a favor, but trying to sweet talk him, sneak up on him, not going to work. He’s been there. As he says, he’s always getting these calls for people saying with my idea and your money, we can do wonders.
Preston: [00:06:23] Oh my goodness. Well you know, a master at the soft sell can probably smell a soft sell really quickly.
Roger: [00:06:29] Exactly.
Stig: [00:06:31] It’s really interesting that you would say this Roger, because it’s a very good transition to my first question. Few people have been studying Warren Buffett as well as you have. What do you think is the most important thing that people don’t know about him?
Roger: [00:06:45] I think the hardest thing to get about Buffett and the hardest thing to get about value investing is there’s no formula. Buffett and his friend Bill Ruane, can’t remember which said it, but to quote it, you either get this in the first five minutes is explained to you or you never get it. There’s no computer program that can tell you what the next six best stocks are. There’s no you know Dogs of the Dow secret formula. It’s part art, certainly part science in that you’re evaluating securities based on their reported numbers, but there’s also an instinct, but it’s an educated instinct. It’s the instinct based on years of appraising companies with similar dynamics. But every company has its own dynamic in its own period of time. So if you’re looking at you know Uber you might be looking at other companies that had network effects that were trying to disturb a settled industry like this taxicab industry. But you wouldn’t find one exactly like Uber that existed before. That’s where the you know the art side of it comes in since you’re ultimately making a decision. And this is where I really get to Buffett, you relying on your own judgment and not on what the stock market’s doing every day. It’s not about whether this stock has been going up or down. It’s where you think the intrinsic value is going to be, meaning the cash flow generating power in five and even ten years. Buffett holds his investments for 10, 20 years. If you’re holding for that time period, what they’re saying on CNBC is irrelevant. What the Fed’s going to do is irrelevant. I just had this discussion with one of your competitors or to speak who said, well don’t you have to know what the euro is going to do? Seriously, I said you’ve got to be kidding. If you’d bought Starbucks 20 years ago and you’d been right on the franc, it wouldn’t have mattered. If you’d been wrong on the franc it wouldn’t have mattered. All that mattered was that you could see that there was a company that had been able to build a brand for premium coffee drinks. You know, what the exchange rate was going to do, what the Fed was going to do, whether it was going to be war in the Middle East, there has probably been three of them since then, none of that mattered if you got the basic long-term decision about the company right. It takes a lot of, and I come back to Buffett again, a lot of self-confidence to ignore all that other stuff and that’s really his special quality. He’s more able than any investor that I know of to say I think this is going to work in the long term and everything else is shut to decide, you know market forecasts, market trends. He’s buying shares of businesses to hold.
Preston: [00:09:20] So let me ask you this since you, I mean you identified him very early on as somebody that you want to invest in, somebody that was worth watching, somebody that was worth writing about. If you had to make that call again today of who the next Buffett like business person in America or anywhere in the world for that matter, who is that person? So like I think Jeff Bezos, but I’m curious to hear your thoughts as a person who.
Roger: I think Jeff Bezos is the singular businessman of our era. You mean of his generation. I wouldn’t say he’s the Warren Buffett of this generation because he’s not a capital allocator. There’s no one business that Warren does or I guess really the insurance business you’d have to say but even there he has people underwriting policies. Warren’s singular unmatched skill is allocating capital to companies and managers who do run business such as Jeff Bezos. I would say that Jeff is the John D. Rockefeller of his age, someone who has competed so relentlessly as to Rockefeller basically drove everyone else in his business either into merging with him or going out of business. I’m not saying that a Bezos is an illegal monopolist as you know Rockefeller was convicted of but he’s clearly the greatest competitor and the hungriest competitor of the digital age. Can he pick stocks? I have no idea. And Buffett talks about circle of competence, there are other things that Bezos does so well that he sticks within his circle confidences, which is you know electronic retailing and spin offs now to as the same physical retailing to Whole Foods. In terms of you know the next Buffett, you know there are a half dozen investors I really, really, really respect. I think of Buffett as really a one of. You know he’s been doing this since 1956. That’s 61 years. You know he’s had top drawer results for 61 years. If you combine Buffett’s record with his endurance with also his skill as a manager running a conglomerate with 70 companies, with his larger role in the American business culture he’s really become the teacher of business and investing for student annual report readers and now listeners on all the shows he’s interviewed on. He’s created a role that never existed, and I think you know there’s not going to be another one. Interestingly, I saw signs of this way early in his career before anyone had heard of Warren Buffett when he was in a fraternity actually. When he transferred to, maybe was it Penn the first school he went to, his fraternity brothers used to have him stand up against the wall and then pepper him with questions just because they like to hear his answers. And then a few years later when he was a young investor, he’d go to these dinner parties in New York and then have a kind of a ritual, a bunch of young brokers and investors, Bill Ruane was probably there. Half dozen others and they would all gather around his feet, all these other grown men, his peers, and listen to him talk and pepper him with questions again because they want to hear him speak. It was an unconscious, a dress rehearsal for the day when decades later when he’d be running his company Berkshire Hathaway with annual meetings where 40,000 people would show up to hear him talk. When has ever been a stock picking with 40000 people flying across the country. I think he’s sort of a one of, we’re not going to see it again.
Preston: [00:12:49] Yeah, you might be right about that. I want to throw this out there though Roger. If you ever wrote a book called Bezos, I would absolutely buy it.
Roger: [00:12:58] Well, you know with a biography at least, they’re all, all the things I just said about Buffett is, self-confidence, the way he approaches stocks, his unique role in the American investing culture and so on, that hasn’t changed although it’s certainly grown. Whereas with Jeff Bezos, I don’t think his story can quite be written yet. Will he go down as the guy who ended the bookstore? Will he have his own, you know anti-trust challenge? It’s certainly not unthinkable and you wouldn’t want to miss that. After all, Bill Gates had Google’s dealing with those types of threats and there’s certainly a very live issue about how society will deal with and regulate digital giants that although they escape some of the traditional nets for any trusting regulations nonetheless are extremely powerful and getting more so economic entities. And at some point, these tremendous business titans face what I would call their role in society moment. At least you know a great many of them do. And it wouldn’t surprise me if there’s some type of drama that Bezos they had at some point or at very least till he’ll face decisions on what to do with his wealth. So right now when both he and Amazon are still sort of a rocket ship pointed upward, well they may have to get a younger biographer.
Preston: [00:14:21] Well I hope you do write it someday.
Stig Brodersen: So speaking about business titans, it’s really hard to tell you about Warren Buffett without mentioning Charlie Munger. And I’d say based on my own experience in partly reading about him beforehand but also experiencing Charlie Munger at the Berkshire Hathaway meeting, he is just such a brilliant person. So I’m curious about your thoughts on this. Do you think that Charlie Munger has a huge impact on where Warren Buffett is today or do you think Warren Buffett would probably be where he is today in his own right regardless of the influence of Charlie Munger?
Roger: [00:14:58] I would say more the latter, and that’s not to depreciate Charlie at all. Charlie is also a genius, a curmudgeonly genius, where as Warren is you know a sunnier, you know optimistic, you know at times almost so optimistic about America and so on he’s almost a cheerleader. Charlie, I’ll never forget the time I first met Charlie, I was reporting you know researching the Buffett biography. I was very excited. I was writing people close to him. Most people did cooperate but some didn’t. And naturally when I sent a letter I’d wait with bated breath and Charlie said you know come out, I’ll see you at the California Club, which is where he hangs out in Los Angeles. So I flew out there and we sat down and I had a primitive personal computer laptop with me and I started to ask questions. And Charlie just starts to talk. I probably asked two questions you know in four hours and he just kept on. I just kept typing. And you’d think that there would be no limit if you’re trying to get all the dirt, not in an unclean way, but just you know the good stuff you can get on your subject. And here you’ve got the guy who in the business sense knows him best. You sit there for three days. But the human mind doesn’t work that way, after some spell of time you just can’t really take it anymore. You just got to walk around a block or something. So I remember it was about four hours had gone by and I said that Charlie, it’s been great, I think I’ve had enough for the first day. And he just stood up turned you know 90 degrees towards the door and walked out. Not a word. Not a I enjoyed it or I didn’t enjoy. It was more and I said to somebody, did I say the wrong thing? Oh no that’s just Charlie, he doesn’t waste time on salutations. In terms of your question, you know how responsible is he, I think Charlie has been you know a terrific sounding board for Warren, a) because he’s so so so smart, he’s so you know unconventional or at least unafraid of convention. There’s no censor there you know. There was one time the two of them were walking down the hallway and they had this manager who was, the company he was running wasn’t going well, and the guy came was always asking him questions should I do this should I do that he was just a big bother for them. And he was coming toward them and Charlie just blurts out “Here comes trouble.” He and his singular ability, Warren used to call him the abominable no-man, Charlie doesn’t get stars in his eyes about company CEOs they might be investing with or he doesn’t fall for you heard it all you know. If you gave me a million dollars that uses to try to con Charlie Munger I would give you money back, I just couldn’t do it. And by the way he doesn’t get conned by Warren either. A lot of people find it hard to tell Warren, you know you’re really all wet on this one. Not Charlie, and that’s invaluable. You see with a lot of politicians that they surround themselves by yes-men. And you know Warren surrounded himself by one guy that he has personally called the no-man. So I think that’s been tremendously useful that’s made, it saves him from mistakes, I think it’s made the work more fun for Warren to have this partner alter ego. They see so many things alike and they have this professional and personal partnership for four or whatever decades now. I don’t think you know many of the ideas came from Charlie. So, early in his career, Warren was still very much picking stocks the way his teacher Ben Graham picked them, which was basically looking for inexpensive securities. Holding them until they got up to their trading value, fair value. And Charlie urged Warren to go from now I’d say OK businesses with cheap prices to good businesses with reasonable prices. And one of the first ones they did this was See’s Candies. I think the figures in the book that are this, but it was something like 30, 35 million dollars, a lot of money for back then. Charlie certainly encouraged him to do that. And I think Warren would have got there anyway. In fact he already you know when he was running See’s was the mid-70s, but in the late 60s you know Warren on his own was buying American Express. A terrific business, a bump in the road. So Charlie encouraged and probably hastened Warren’s evolution to paying more than Ben Graham with a pay but I think had it not been for Charlie you know we would still be having this conversation would the stock be 270K or 240, that stuff’s hard to say, but I think it’s been a bit of a healthier, more pleasurable process for Warren. I’ve known, you know maybe you’ve known people who run businesses and they find themselves who haven’t had someone at their level to bounce things off of. And that’s a strain and they suffered for it maybe in ways that are intangible as much as tangible.
Preston: [00:19:53] Roger I just want to highlight to the audience why that nugget that Charlie Munger kind of added to Buffett’s approach is so important and it really comes down to the tax implications. So when Buffett was able to buy good quality businesses at a decent price opposed to just a severely discounted price that’s a marginal business. He was able to continue to hold the pick in perpetuity as long as possible and by doing that he didn’t pay any capital gains by half sell it a few years later. He was able to just continue to let it compound a compound. And so there’s many people out there that believe that this approach has add significant value to Buffett’s ability to compound at such a high rate is because that means that the tax aspect is important.
Roger: [00:20:36] I don’t think it’s the largest aspect Actually actually you know if you have a business let’s say it earns a you know 8 percent a year on capital which you know most people say good but not great. But if it’s clocking the way that 8 percent year after year and if this is a big if if it’s a type of business that is growing so that each year it can reinvest the earnings at 8 percent a year and you do that over decades the relative difference is enormous because what’s not happening is you’re not selling after three years as you said paying the tax. Then the money is dead for 18 months or six months. Do you buy one for another three years. If you keep buying a succession of businesses one or two is going to be 11. So instead of having 8 percent you know you’re going to have minus 14 every so often. Or are you going to have to find a business that gives you one great shot 20 percent and then it can’t take the money and then you’re just getting cash back and you don’t have to hunt for that money if you can keep the money at work. Eight nine 10 11 percent. Year after year. Over a span of time. The compounding effect is extraordinary and you’ve avoided the real pitfall of most Vestris which is that dead space time the backtracking because in investments that is good.
Stig: [00:21:58] That’s such a grand point and something that we really try to talk about on this show because time is just such a massive expense for us investors. You know it’s hard to sit on the sidelines and not do anything but continuing the discussion of Bob and Warren Buffett. It’s just a long time since you wrote the first book.
Preston: [00:22:18] Is there anything you wish you included that you learned since in terms of how I would paint him and now really very little has changed as I said I did update the book with a new epilogue or afterword or something. But 12 years after the book came out I reissued it because his wife had died remarried. It turned out to be his first wife which required him to fill in a piece of the puzzle that people were very interested in which was of course what he would do with his state. Now that wasn’t going to Suzy because he asked away in the plan had been that she would make this decision. So now he had to make. And of course he chose for the bulk of his estate the Gates Foundation plan of peeling off stock you know year by year his Foundation Foundation. I thought that was a required update. You know more than whatever new company he’s acquired since then has certainly been plenty. So for that purpose I updated the book and Espen you.
Roger: [00:23:21] Yeah. That I think that that’s such an important story to tell and such a profound story to tell about the impact that all this money is going to have so many lives I think is just so profound. Let’s go ahead and talk a little bit more about your newest book out there America’s banks so I just recently finished this one Roger. It was quite interesting. I have read the creature from Jekyll Island about the Fed and it really kind of has a very pessimistic point of view and I found that your book was much more balanced. It seemed like you paid more attention to just the pure facts of how the bank was set up and you’re telling that story which was refreshing to hear I guess I’m curious if you have the same opinion as many people have today where they think that the Fed is in a very tricky situation. And you know some would call it a dire situation. Do you see that as being as dire as everyone saying.
Roger: [00:24:15] Well first I think it’s remarkable that we’re having virtually the same conversation about Central Bank today that we had you know in the period 100 years ago you know that was the focus of the book and really is the same conversation that we were having. A hundred and eighty years ago when Andrew Jackson was you know taking a hatchet to the second bank of United States the you know the previous experiment Rutlidge experiment in central banking and the same discussion that failed the first bank. Then I’d say the one founded by Alexander Hamilton this enormous suspicion of large banks central banks. Any connection between governmental banking authorities in Washington and large private banks in New York These were demons in Andrew Jackson’s they were demons. Woodrow Wilson and Paul Warburg Carnac last try to set up what became the Federal Reserve and their demons for you know certainly the entire Tea Party section of the Republican Party and for many in the far left in the Democratic Party. And you know by the way that’s not the way it is in the rest of the world in France or in Japan. Can any other country you can think of the idea of having central monetary institution to regulate the banks that interest rates unify the financial strength of the country in times of stress. You know this is as basic as having a cohesive army instead of a bunch of random foot soldiers. Having a centralized post office. But the Federalist mistrust centralized authority is our birthright in this country and it’s a very strong force even today which is why for me writing this book was a lot of fun.
Roger: [00:25:57] You know in terms of whether the Fed is at a tricky point today you know tell me the time when it hasn’t seemed as if it’s at a tricky point. I mean if it is responsible for the monetary stability of the largest economy in the world. So what it does has great ramifications specifically today gigantic balance sheet of course accumulated during the aftermath of the great recession. You know four trillion dollars that’s a lot of balance sheet and my own guess by the way it’s going to be a little bumpier. I just don’t think you can sell that out of bonds and not have there be some disquiet in markets. I mean what does it mean to be when you’re buying bonds you’re lending. And that’s what they were doing in on of this years they were lending therefore adding quality to this. Well when you’re selling bonds you’re borrowing you’re creating demand that generally drives up interest rates. Some of this they’re going to do not by selling bonds but just not by replacing the ones that they have on their balance sheet. Now that will probably be less disruptive but nonetheless that means that markets won’t be enjoying the periodic stimulus that they’ve been getting because up till now the Fed has been replacing bonds or bills that have been running off.
Preston: [00:27:14] Now they’re not you know whenever I look through today’s issue and kind of compare it to spots and time in the past. The thing that I think makes today so much different is that you have this polarization with this credit expansion that occurred when you look over at Europe you look at Japan you look at the U.S. Now you’re talking about how they’re going to start offloading it and they’re going to just basically let the shorter term bonds not just mature. And that’s kind of how they’re going to offload it. But I don’t know that we’ve seen something happen on such a global level. Would you agree with that. And I’m curious to hear your thoughts on it.
Roger: [00:27:50] You know in the 1920s late 20s and early 30s the French the British and the Americans tried to coordinate central banking activities. They didn’t do a very good job of it. But it’s not as if international markets that they weren’t interconnected and affecting each other for many decades to some extent it’s beneficial right now because there’s still QE going on in the countries you mention are still stimulus. So as we withdraw stimulus the fact that other countries are behind us there are worldwide have ameliorative you know Cidade of effect by not having everybody rushing out the doors at the same time. But yes I mean they’re interconnected and that makes things.
Stig: [00:28:36] I think you’re asking you know harder to program and to project and so you know Afon really interesting what just said about us perhaps discussing something we talked about hundred years ago. And the thing some of the issues that we are debating today might be dating back to the formation back in 1913. What’s the most profound thing you found about the formation of the Fed. One of them was just how
Roger: [00:29:03] Actually they debated the same things. The debate today and the same styles they really populous who you know didn’t trust bankers they were bankers who were aghast at the notion of putting anyone in government in charge of anything to do with the banking sector. They were Wall Street people who were convinced that the Fed was going to basically destroy the economy by being inherently inflationary. By the way the gold standard still existed when Fed was created. On the other side you know there were people from the southwest and agricultural sectors who were afraid that the built in. Dynamics of the Fed research they would be inherently disinflationary by the way I think they were much closer to the truth.
Roger: [00:29:45] And the inflation is as you think that the reason that you called them the inflation Easters would you say that they were wrong because there was a gold standard in place and I know that we came off the gold standard for a brief period of time there in the 30s during the Great Depression but we then went back on the gold standard and we’re on it for you know decades of debt. When you think that that’s why maybe the inflation Easter’s were wrong about their opinion of the Fed.
Roger: [00:30:08] They won’t for a couple of reasons one was that we were still in the gold standard which had been. So ultimately you couldn’t mint more federal reserve notes even though they were different notes in the old National Bank had been serving as money. You couldn’t get more of them than there was calls behind them. It’s a ratio and the amount of gold was limited. And then there was so much controversy over whether authority in the Fed will be housed in the branches to get that reserve bank of Philadelphia St. Louis York itself or in Washington to get it through Congress. And many of these decisions were left vague and the Fed was born with a very uncertain lines of authority so that when the time came that we really needed a dose of liquidity and of course me during what became the great depression there were cross lines on certain lines of authority and there was no clear one organism or mechanism or actor responsible for getting the economy going again. Obviously Ben Bernanke is obviously in charge in 2008. So the gold standard was a terrible restraint. And it was just a lines of authority check which hampered them for using the tools they did.
Preston: [00:31:24] Interesting. So this is one of our favorite questions to ask on the show because it’s our chance to kind of pick your brain even further. After the interviews over so what’s one of the bebest-investingooks or business books that you’ve ever read.
Roger: [00:31:38] Really like John Kenneth Galbraith the great crash about 1929. You know you read it in a day and a half in a little book it’s terribly witty you know all is always wonderfully witty. You know I just pick out a few that in no particular order once in Golconda by John Brooks again about the twenties and thirties was a wonderful book. I’m going to stop there because I don’t want to seem to be even close to exhaustive because then I feel bad about leaving half of very good books that that’s some of the three I’ve always really admired and those are fantastic.
Preston: [00:32:15] I can’t I can’t wait to dig into the first one because I wasn’t familiar with that so I’ll be picking that up today.
Roger: [00:32:20] The Great Crash. Yeah. No I haven’t read it yet. Terrific writer.
Preston: [00:32:25] Well I want the audience to know said the two books that we were talking about today that Roger wrote Buffett the making of an American capitalist. This is such an incredible books want to stigmatize favorite books out there and then the second book is America’s bank. It’s all about the formation of the Federal Reserve. Roger if people want to learn more about you where can they find you on the Internet.
Roger: [00:32:45] Well a Web site. Rachel I was in Georgetown so complicated. Perfect perfect. You can order any of the books.
Preston: [00:32:52] They’re fantastic. Roger thank you so much for taking time out of your busy day to talk with us and share your thoughts with our audience.
Roger: [00:33:00] It is great talking. Really enjoyed it.
Books and Resources Mentioned in this Podcast
Roger Lowenstein’s website
Roger Lowenstein’s book, Buffett the Making of an American Capitalist
Roger Lowenstein’s book, America’s Bank
John Galbraith’s book, The Great Crash 1929 – Read reviews of this book
Nathaniel Popper’s book, Digital Gold – Read reviews of this book
Preston and Stig’s podcast episode about, The Age of Cryptocurrencies