Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 147

Investing in the best long-term founders

Amazon, Berkshire Hathaway, Google, Starbucks and until recently Apple have been some of the best-performing shares in the market. They were also all led by their founders. We believe their long-term view is an advantage in a market that usually thinks short term. Most founders have a view that spans decades. This allows them to take advantage of opportunities that cost in the short term but pay off big in the long term.

It’s the opposite approach and mindset of professional managers that sign on for caretaker roles for a few years. Founders tend to be more willing to disrupt their businesses. A major example has been Apple and Steve Jobs. He returned and released the iPod, a product that soon dominated the music market. At the time, investors questioned what Apple could do next. We all know what happened then as they disrupted themselves. Steve Jobs introduced the iPhone and then the iPad, two products no analysts predicted. It’s a difficult decision to cannibalise your best-selling product but it’s an easier decision if you’re thinking out decades. Unfortunately, Apple has changed since his passing but there are other founder-led firms with a long-term view.

Jeff Bezos and Amazon

Amazon started out as on online bookstore. Now it’s the most feared retailer in the world. Many retailers are getting ‘amazoned’, which means to watch helplessly as Amazon vacuums up the customers and profits of your traditional ‘bricks and mortar’ business. Amazon does not care about short-term quarterly profitability. They also created AWS, the leading cloud computing service. It’s hard to imagine that an online bookstore would become the leading retailer in e-commerce and cloud computing, two of the largest growth opportunities in the world.

A major reason for Amazon’s success is Jeff Bezos’s long-term customer focus. For $99 a year, customers access 20 million items with free two-day shipping. This Amazon Prime service increased its membership by 51% last year. I’m still waiting for it to be available in Australia. Investors initially thought he was crazy to offer free shipping but now it’s a key competitive advantage. Bezos knows that technology changes quickly so he focuses on what won’t change in the longer term, knowing no matter what happens customers will always prefer cheaper prices, more choices and free shipping. While both Prime and shipping are short-term costs, it creates longer-term customer loyalty with these customers spending 140% more than non-members of Prime.

Amazon’s cloud computing business was started 10 years ago and is now a $10 billion revenue business at a 28% operating margin (they disclosed sales and profitability last year for the first time.) It would have been hard to establish this business without the backing of an entrepreneurial founder.

Amazon is also taking the long-term view by moving into homes. Their dash buttons have been a big success (see picture below). Prime members can purchase brand-specific buttons such as for Tide detergent, attach them to their washing machine and press the Tide button every time they run low on detergent. If that’s not easy enough they have introduced voice ordering with Amazon Echo. If you run out of toothpaste while brushing your teeth, you can tell Echo to reorder without bothering to open your smartphone. What’s better than a store that sells everything, open 24/7? A voice-activated store that buys you everything you need without you having to remember it.

Larry Page and Google (now Alphabet)

Google is another famous founder-led company. Not many companies I follow have a category for investing in moon shots. Google takes the long-term view investing in driverless cars instead of just incremental search improvements. Google’s founder Larry Page is an inventor but also a great businessman. Some of their investments have worked out extremely well. They paid around $50 million for Android and the $US1.65 billion acquisition of YouTube in 2006 has been one of the best acquisitions of all time. When investing they don’t look at the profitability but at the long-term usefulness of the product. Products must pass his toothbrush test. They invest only in products that are as useful and meaningful as a toothbrush that you use twice a day. This approach means Google now has seven products with over a billion users.

Google spent $3.6 billion in moon shots last year, an increase of 84% on the prior year. A non-founder is unlikely to make these longer term investments. Now that it is called Alphabet (Google is its largest division) it will be interesting to see what comes next. It might seem strange for Google, an internet company, to invest in health care (longevity is a focus) but it makes more sense for a conglomerate like Alphabet. What potential employee wouldn’t be inspired to join a company that is willing to take on long-term problems?

Howard Schultz and Starbucks

Technology founders get the lion’s share of people’s attention but I am constantly amazed by what Howard Schultz, the founder of Starbucks, has built. Coffee is an extremely competitive market with low barriers to entry but there is still only one global coffee chain. Starbucks serves 85 million customers around the world every week at an average sale of $5. Most people buy from Starbucks not because of the coffee but because of the brand and how they treat their employees and customers. Howard not only helped create the business but came back and turned it around when Starbucks overextended its growth in 2008. He shut stores to retrain baristas, stopped reporting monthly sales and introduced technology to make ordering easier.

Taking the long-term view, Starbucks invests in its employees. It recently offered full college tuition coverage with a goal to graduating 25,000 employees by 2025. The technology investments were also a major hit to the bottom line but Starbucks now processes the most mobile payment transactions in America (21% of transactions) and it has introduced mobile ordering. No more waiting in line. Starbucks is also trialling delivery e-commerce based on a coffee app.

We believe that some of the best growth investments are found in founder-led firms. They have the advantage of longer term views and the ability to take advantage of opportunities that most companies couldn’t or wouldn’t invest in. In a quarterly focused world, it’s a major advantage.

 

Jason Sedawie is a Portfolio Manager at Decisive Asset Management, a global growth-focused fund. Disclosure: Decisive holds Amazon, Google and Starbucks. This article is for general purposes only and does not consider the specific needs of any individual.

 

RELATED ARTICLES

How Barry Lambert beat the banks at their own game

Two companies well-positioned amid supply chain disruption

Is there an Uber or Amazon of wealth management?

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

The case for the $3 million super tax

The Government's proposed tax has copped a lot of flack though I think it's a reasonable approach to improve the long-term sustainability of superannuation and the retirement income system. Here’s why.

7 examples of how the new super tax will be calculated

You've no doubt heard about Division 296. These case studies show what people at various levels above the $3 million threshold might need to pay the ATO, with examples ranging from under $500 to more than $35,000.

The revolt against Baby Boomer wealth

The $3m super tax could be put down to the Government needing money and the wealthy being easy targets. It’s deeper than that though and this looks at the factors behind the policy and why more taxes on the wealthy are coming.

Meg on SMSFs: Withdrawing assets ahead of the $3m super tax

The super tax has caused an almighty scuffle, but for SMSFs impacted by the proposed tax, a big question remains: what should they do now? Here are ideas for those wanting to withdraw money from their SMSF.

The super tax and the defined benefits scandal

Australia's superannuation inequities date back to poor decisions made by Parliament two decades ago. If super for the wealthy needs resetting, so too does the defined benefits schemes for our public servants.

Are franking credits hurting Australia’s economy?

Business investment and per capita GDP have languished over the past decade and the Labor Government is conducting inquiries to find out why. Franking credits should be part of the debate about our stalling economy.

Latest Updates

Superannuation

Here's what should replace the $3 million super tax

With Div. 296 looming, is there a smarter way to tax superannuation? This proposes a fairer, income-linked alternative that respects compounding, ensures predictability, and avoids taxing unrealised capital gains. 

Superannuation

Less than 1% of wealthy families will struggle to pay super tax: study

An ANU study has found that families with at least one super balance over $3 million have average wealth exceeding $19 million - suggesting most are well placed to absorb taxes on unrealised capital gains.   

Superannuation

Are SMSFs getting too much of a free ride?

SMSFs have managed to match, or even outperform, larger super funds despite adopting more conservative investment strategies. This looks at how they've done it - and the potential policy implications.  

Property

A developer's take on Australia's housing issues

Stockland’s development chief discusses supply constraints, government initiatives and the impact of Japanese-owned homebuilders on the industry. He also talks of green shoots in a troubled property market.

Economy

Lessons from 100 years of growing US debt

As the US debt ceiling looms, the usual warnings about a potential crash in bond and equity markets have started to appear. Investors can take confidence from history but should keep an eye on two main indicators.

Investment strategies

Investors might be paying too much for familiarity

US mega-cap tech stocks have dominated recent returns - but is familiarity distorting judgement? Like the Monty Hall problem, investing success often comes from switching when it feels hardest to do so.

Latest from Morningstar

A winning investment strategy sitting right under your nose

How does a strategy built around systematically buying-and-holding a basket of the market's biggest losers perform? It turns out pretty well, so why don't more investors do it?

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2025 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.