The typical 'buy and hold forever' strategy is riskier than perceived because the median lifespan of a public company is just a decade. This high corporate mortality rate, driven by M&A and failure, underscores the need for investors to regularly reassess holdings rather than assume longevity.
Cisco's stock took 25 years to reclaim its year-2000 peak, despite the underlying business growing significantly. This serves as a stark reminder that even a successful, growing company can deliver zero returns for decades if an investor buys in at an extremely high, bubble-era valuation.
Contrary to popular belief, the market may be getting less efficient. The dominance of indexing, quant funds, and multi-manager pods—all with short time horizons—creates dislocations. This leaves opportunities for long-term investors to buy valuable assets that are neglected because their path to value creation is uncertain.
Some companies execute a 3-5 year plan and then revert to average returns. Others 'win by winning'—their success creates new opportunities and network effects, turning them into decade-long compounders that investors often sell too early.
The traditional IPO exit is being replaced by a perpetual secondary market for elite private companies. This new paradigm provides liquidity for investors and employees without the high costs and regulatory burdens of going public. This shift fundamentally alters the venture capital lifecycle, enabling longer private holding periods.
The seed investing landscape isn't just expanding; it's actively replacing its previous generation. Legacy boutique seed firms are being squeezed by large multistage funds and new emerging managers, implying a VC's relevance has a 10-15 year cycle before a new cohort takes over.
Simply "thinking long-term" is not enough. A genuine long-term approach requires three aligned components: 1) a long-term perspective, 2) an investment structure (like an open-ended fund) that doesn't force short-term decisions, and 3) a clear understanding of what "long-term" means (10 years vs. 50 years).
Corporate leaders are incentivized and wired to pursue growth through acquisition, constantly getting bigger. However, they consistently fail at the strategically crucial, but less glamorous, task of divesting assets at the right time, often holding on until value has significantly eroded.
The key lesson from Exor is that patient, long-term investing doesn't mean avoiding action. Learned from an early survival crisis, their leadership makes a few specific, intentional decisions each year to refresh the portfolio, demonstrating that decisiveness is critical even with a multi-generational time horizon.
While having a disciplined rule like reviewing a stock after 24 months is useful, it should be subordinate to a more critical rule: sell immediately if the fundamental investment thesis breaks. This flexibility prevents holding onto a losing position simply to adhere to a predefined timeline.
In a market dominated by short-term traders and passive indexers, companies crave long-duration shareholders. Firms that hold positions for 5-10 years and focus on long-term strategy gain a competitive edge through better access to management, as companies are incentivized to engage with stable partners over transient capital.