By: Loic Luke LeMener, CFA

, MBA, CFP

Copyright 20J0 Loic LeMener
100 fl 0l N880f $0l00ll0
ore lhan ever, inveslors loday are bombarded vilh hundreds of adverlisemenls every
year, ilching differenl inveslmenl roducls or money managers. Iicking among lhese
lhousands of aIlernalives can seem an imossibIe feal. In lhis aer, ve exIore an inleIIecluaI
viIIage ul forlh by Warren uffell as one of lhe mosl successfuI and reealabIe
melhodoIogies in lhe hislory of invesling. The rimary conviclion from lhis schooI of lhoughl
is lhal assels shouId be boughl onIy vhen lheir rice is a fraclion of a reasonabIy caIcuIaled
vaIue, ignoring everylhing eIse.

Thc Prnb!cm
Inveslors are oflen fruslraled by a Iack
of cIarily vhen il comes lo icking
arlicuIar money managers for differenl
arls of lheir orlfoIio. They usuaIIy
ick vho has been doing veII onIy lo
valch lhal manager nol onIy Iose vaIue
on an absoIule basis, bul even Iag his
eers. Or monlhs afler lheir funds slo
erforming, lhey reaIize loo Iale lhal lhe
firm has changed managers on lhem.

Given lhe induslry's merry-go-round of
fund managers, funds merging, cIosing
and oening and erformance so
fIeeling, hov do you ick lhe besl
olion for you from lhousands of
aIlernalives` Ior some inveslors, doing
so can cause exlreme fruslralion.

One schooI of lhoughl says lo |usl give
u and buy index funds. AIlhough lhese
inveslmenl vehicIes are cerlainIy chea,
invesling in lhem is a far-from-erfecl
soIulion. Mosl indexes are markel-ca
veighled, lhis means lhe higher lhe
vaIue of lhe firm in lhe markel (read
olenliaIIy overvaIued) lhe bigger lhe
veighl il is given in lhe index. This is
vhy lhe highesl seclor veighling in lhe
S&I 500 in 1999 vas lechnoIogy and in
2007 vas financiaIs. IssenliaIIy, lhis
means lhal index funds invesl vhere
everyone eIse is invesling mosl heaviIy
M

2
al any given lime. As a coIIeague of
mine once ul il, Indexes invesl Iike
drunken saiIors. This senlimenl is nol
enlireIy unlrue, as indexes have a severe
momenlum and grovlh bias.

Hovever, aIlhough indexing cerlainIy
has inherenl robIems, severaI academic
sludies demonslrale lhal, due lo high
cosls and inexerienced managers,
indexing sliII beals lhe ma|orily of
acliveIy managed rograms on an afler-
lax, afler-fee basis.

IarIy in my career, I found seIecling
managers a uzzIing lask. Then, one
day, I slumbIed uon a seech given by
Warren uffell in 1984 lilIed, The
Suerinveslors of Graham and
DoddsviIIe. Thal singIe seech changed
my vievoinl such lhal lhis uzzIe
became a vorkabIe robIem for me.

Thc 5n!utinn
In his seech, uffell slarls vilh a
lhoughl exerimenl lhal goes somelhing
Iike lhis:
If one hoIds a nalionaI coin fIiing
conlesl, in vhich he asks 225 miIIion
Americans lo redicl coin fIis
accuraleIy, afler 20 days, lhere vouId
onIy be aboul 215 eoIe Iefl in lhe
comelilion. These eoIe vouId gel
relly cocky aboul lheir abiIily lo caII a
coin loss, unliI some malh rofessor
became rude enough lo oinl oul lhal
225 miIIion orangulans fIiing coins
vouId gel lhe same resuIl. ul nov,
suose oul of lhe 215 vinning
orangulans, 50 came from lhe same
zoo.you'd be relly sure you vere on
lo somelhing. LikeIy, you vouId go lo
lhal zoo and ask lhe zookeeer vhal
he's been feeding lhe vinning
orangulans, vhal exercises lhey do and
vho knovs vhal eIse.

Like lhe orangulans, vhal uffell and
his cohorls vere fed vas a
melhodoIogy handed dovn by
en|amin Graham and David Dodd,
generaIIy considered lhe falhers of vaIue
invesling. Their common inleIIecluaI
viIIage uffell caIIed Graham &
DoddsviIIe (a.k.a. vaIue invesling).

uffell goes on lo rofiIe nine of his
eers from lhal viIIage, vho had
muIliIe decades of suerior inveslmenl
erformance. Il is imorlanl lo nole lhal
lhese men vere onIy fed a simiIar
schooI of lhoughl as uffell, lhey vere
nol icked vilh lhe benefil of hindsighl
by him afler lhe facl.

Al lhe core of lhe vaIue invesling
hiIosohy is finding a discreancy
belveen rice and vaIue. To arahrase
uffell:

The common inleIIecluaI lheme of
lhe inveslors from Graham &
DoddsviIIe is lhis: lhey search for
discreancies belveen lhe ta|uc of
a business and lhe pricc of smaII
ieces of lhal business in lhe
markel. They exIoil lhis
discreancy and don'l care
vhelher slocks are boughl on
Monday or Thursday, or vhelher
il is }anuary or }uIy. IncidenlaIIy
lhis is lhe vay businessmen buy
businesses. Our G&D inveslors do
nol discuss bela, CAIM, charls or

3
covariance in relurns among
securilies. Can you imagine buying
a vhoIe business because lhe rice
of lhe business had been marked
u subslanliaIIy lhe veek before`
These are nol sub|ecls lhal inleresl
lhem. These inveslors simIy focus
on lvo variabIes: rice and vaIue.

Il sounds so simIe, and il is sinp|c.bul
lhal doesn'l mean il's casq. IseciaIIy
lhe arl aboul nol being dislracled by
lhe muIlilude of olher lhings you can
ay inlenlion lo, nol Ieasl of vhich is lhe
Inlernel/TV informalion overIoad.

Through my exlensive readings of
Iegendary vaIue inveslors, I icked u
on some common lrails lhal mosl of
lhem emIoy. VaIue inveslors.

.distinguish bctwccn invcsting and
spccu!ating.
In lhe sequeI lo Wa|| Sircci, lhe nolorious
Gordon Gekko slales, SecuIalion is
lhe molher of aII eviIs. And for once, I
agree vilh him. ul hov do you make
lhe aII-imorlanl dislinclion belveen
invesling and secuIaling` I have
slruggIed vilh lhis dislinclion for years,
as il is a sublIe, bul incredibIy imorlanl
nuance.

en|amin Graham defines invesling as
an inveslmenl oeralion is one vhich,
uon lhorough anaIysis romises safely
of rinciaI and an adequale relurn.
Oeralions nol meeling lhese
requiremenls are secuIalive. Thinking
aboul Graham's vords and olhers for a
Iong lime, I evenluaIIy sellIed on my
ersonaI definilion:

An lntestment ls un usset uhereb
uslng consertutlte ussumptlons ubout
the future, one cun expect the usset to
generute enough cush to ensure u
sutlsfuctor return for the percelted rlsk
tukeneterthlng eIse ls specuIutlon.

When I say cash relurn," I don'l mean a
slock rice going u and lhe inveslor
having more cash, I mean lhe firm (or
olher assel) ilseIf is generaling cash and
eilher aying il oul as dividends, slock
buybacks or reinvesling il in lhe
business lo comound lhe vaIue of lhal
assel. As ruce erkovilz says IoIIov
lhe cash, for il is lhe onIy vay lo be
sure vaIue viII exisl al some oinl in lhe
fulure.

In considering vhal dislinguishes an
inveslmenl from a secuIalion, il is
imorlanl lo nole vhal lhe dislinclion
excIudes, such as urchases vilh lhe
hoe of seIIing lo a grealer fooI. Ior
examIe, many inveslors Iooked Iike
geniuses in lhe Iale 90s as nearIy
everylhing anyone louched lurned lo
goId over a eriod of many years. ul
once lhe lechnoIogy secuIaling ended,
many of lhese genius inveslors vere Iefl
enniIess and Iives vere shallered.

CarefuIIy dislinguishing belveen
invesling and secuIaling aIso means
lhal invesling in non-cash generaling
asselssuch is goIdis, al Ieasl by my
definilion, secuIalion. Think aboul il,
vhal gives goId ils vaIue` In facl, lhe
cash fIovs from goId are negalive: you
have lo mine il, slore il, lransorl il,
insure il, elc.The onIy lhing lhal gives

4
goId any vaIue is lhe facl lhal someone
eIse is viIIing lo ay for il. So an
inveslmenl in goId is IargeIy secuIaling
as lo vhal olher eoIe viII be viIIing
lo ay for il al some oinl in lhe fulure.

A coroIIary lo my definilion of an
inveslmenl is, if you invesl in individuaI
slocks and you are nol inlimaleIy
famiIiar vilh financiaI slalemenls, free
cash fIov, discounl rales, slralegic vaIue
drivers, elc.lhen a|| of your slock icks
are secuIalive. This is fine for a Vegas-
lye lhriII bul voefuIIy inadequale if
your orlfoIio is execled lo fund an
imorlanl Iife goaI, Iike your reliremenl.

I knov, I'm no fun. ul I've found lhal
successfuI invesling oflen isn'l.

.vicw risk as pcrmancnt !nss nI
capita!.
Mosl managers are hired, fired and
comensaled based on hov lhey
erform reIalive lo an index. ul hov
ridicuIous vouId il have been lo
measure yourseIf againsl lhe S&I 500 in
1999, amidsl a slralosheric bubbIe` Yel
mosl money managers did and do lake
lheir index as lhe neulraI osilion and
go from lhere. y and Iarge, lhey're nol
lo be bIamed for laking lhis fauIly
osilion, as lhal is usuaIIy hov lhey are
measured and bonused. Hovever, if
you consider lhis Iine of lhinking
carefuIIy, il is cIearIy quile insane.

UnIike lheir eers, vaIue inveslors viev
risk as a ermanenl Ioss of cailaI.
Iermanenl Ioss of cailaI is more aboul
lhe ta|uc of an inveslmenl lhan il is
aboul ils pricc. This is vhal aIIovs
voIaliIily lo be lhe vaIue inveslor's
friend. To iIIuslrale, consider a
hyolhelicaI firm lhalbased on your
diIigenl researchyou are convinced is
vorlh $100 er share. You see ils slock
rice go from $100 (nol a bargain) er
share, dovn lo $90, lhen lo $80, and
lhen a anic reaIIy hils and ils slock aII
of a sudden begins lrading al $50 er
share. WouIdn'l you slarl saIivaling`
Gelling more and more exciled as lhe
rice venl dovn` This means you couId
buy an assel lhal you knov lhrough and
lhrough is vorlh $100 for onIy
$50.lhal's lhe besl deaI in lovn! This is
exaclIy lhe core of vaIue invesling.

And lhis is vhy uffell says, "My
enlhusiasm for slocks is in direcl
roorlion lo hov far lhey go
dovn." The robIem is a Iol of inveslors,
incIuding fund managers, haven'l done
lheir homevork and don'l have enough
conviclion in lhe vaIue of lhe assels lhey
are invesling in. As a consequence, lhey
have lhe oosile reaclion, anicking as
rices dro and raising cash as lhe
markel gels cheaer. In circumslances
Iike lhe above, even vhen rices exceed
our lheorelicaI $100 inlrinsic vaIue,
lhese inveslors slay fuIIy invesled,
fearing lhey viII faII behind lheir eers.
This sorl of shorl-lerm reIalive race is
nonsense and il is uIlimaleIy resonsibIe
for counlIess mediocre relurns in lhe
assel managemenl induslry.

.arc wi!!ing tn hn!d cash.
Cash can be a vaIuabIe inveslmenl al
limes. Think of il lhis vay, if nol forced,
vouId you anle u in a game of oker
vhen lhe odds are nol in your favor` In

5
invesling, lhere cerlainIy are limes vhen
lhe odds are nol in your favor eilher.
You don'l have lo Iay lhe game al lhal
oinl, il vouId be fooIhardy lo anle u
al lhese limes. uffell uses a basebaII
anaIogy, exIaining lhal invesling is Iike
a basebaII game in vhich no slrikes are
ever caIIed. You can |usl sil al home
Iale and vail for lhe erfecl ilch. In
lhis case, onIy lhose vilh lhe forlilude lo
say, Nolhing meels my inveslmenl
crileria loday, I'II vail unliI lomorrov
and Iook again viII avoid eroding lheir
disciIine. This is vhy lhe greal
inveslors have been knovn lo Iel
massive amounls of cash buiId u in
lheir orlfoIios. When lhe masses are
overIy olimislic, lhere simIy may nol
be very many allraclive inveslmenls oul
lhere.

.havc a dcmnnstratcd abi!ity tn gn
against thc crnwd.
Morningslar's manager of lhe decade,
vaIue inveslor ruce erkovilz's sIogan
is Ignore lhe crovd. A highIy
allraclive inveslmenl soughl by lhe
crovd aImosl, by definilion, viII seII
al a remium. A sound vaIue inveslor
avoids lhese assels, searching inslead
for oul of favor assels lhal offer good
vaIue and are, by definilion, chea.
AIied arorialeIy, lhis hiIosohy
viII nearIy aIvays sleer cailaI avay
from bubbIes inlo beller-vaIued firms.

.arc wi!!ing tn usc timc arbitragc.
VaIue inveslors are viIIing lo use lime
arbilrage, invesling in vhal has vaIue
for lhe Iong-lerm and ignoring olenliaI
shorl-lerm svings. }ames Monlier said il
besl:
IxIoilalion of lhe facl lhal mosl
inveslors inslilulionaI,
individuaI, muluaI funds or hedge
funds lend lo have very shorl-lerm
lime horizon, have a raid
lurnover or are lrying lo exIoil
very shorl-lerm anomaIies in lhe
markels. Thus lhe markel Iooks
exlremeIy efficienl in lhe shorl run.
In an environmenl vilh massive
shorl-lerm dala overIoad and vilh
eoIe concerned aboul minule-lo-
minule erformance, lhe
inefficiencies are IikeIy beyond one
year.

In facl, many Iegendary vaIue inveslors
have much Ionger lime frames seeking
lo hoId a firm's slock 5-10 years afler
lhey urchase il.

.cnnccntratc thcir hn!dings.
To arahrase uffell: nobody ever gol
rich on lheir 14
lh
-besl idea. Many fund
managers vho index lo lhe S&I 500
have 200 slocks in lheir orlfoIio vilh a
maximum aIIocalion of 2.5% lo lheir lo
hoIdings. This means, lhey ovn 40% of
lhe index and have lo kee lrack of 200
firms! HisloricaIIy, lhe besl managers
make significanl bels vhen lhey see a
high conviclion oorlunily. There |usl
aren'l lhal many good deaIs oul lhere lo
invesl onIy 2.5% in your favorile one.

uffell is famous for leIIing MA
sludenls lhal lhey vouId become much
beller inveslors if lhey had a unch card
vilh onIy 20 circIes on il, once lhe unch
card vas used u, lhey vouIdn'l be abIe
lo invesl in any more assels. The
inluilion behind lhis idea is simIe: be

6
alienl and vail for a fev greal ideas.
Then, invesl a significanl amounl of
money vhen you find one and hoId on
lo il for a Iong lime. Too many eoIe
invesl in loo many assels casuaIIy,
mislakenIy lhinking lhal
diversificalion is a anacea for nol
doing your homevork, ignorance or
secuIalion.

Whal aboul diversificalion` If I buy
and hoId onIy a fev greal slocks, aren'l I
ulling aII my eggs in one baskel` In his
oorIy lilIed, bul fanlaslic book, You
Can be a Slock Markel Genius, }oeI
GreenbIall breaks dovn lhe slalislics on
diversificalionand you mighl be
surrised al lhe resuIl. He slales, Afler
urchasing six or eighl slocks in
differenl induslries, lhe benefil of
adding even more slocks lo your
orlfoIio in an efforl lo decrease risk is
smaII and, overaII markel risk viII nol
be eIiminaled mereIy by adding more
slocks lo your orlfoIio.

Imagine lhe human cosl in lerms of
allenlion lo delaiI and moniloring
caabiIilies if a manager hoIds onIy 30-
40 slocks in his orlfoIio versus one vho
has 200! Irom an inveslor's slandoinl,
everyone shouId be diversified in al
Ieasl a fev assel cIasses, so even if you
|usl ovned lhe big 5 (Thal is, Iarge, mid
and smaII cas, inlernalionaI slocks and
bonds) and each manager has an
excelionaIIy concenlraled orlfoIio of
|usl 30 securilies (vhich aImosl never
haens) lhen you vouId ovn a lolaI of
150 securilies. This means in an evenIy
veighled orlfoIio, if one of your
manager's icks faIIs lo zero, il vouId
mean a .66% Ioss lo your orlfoIio!
Wov, lhal's scary! Comare lhal lo
conslanlIy ovning dozens of securilies
lhal aren'l your manager's highesl
conviclion icks. UIlimaleIy,
diversificalion is Iike aIcohoI, il shouId
be consumed in moderalion.

.arc wi!!ing tn "cat thcir nwn
cnnking."
Hov much a manager has invesled in
his ovn fund can be a usefuI baromeler
of his beIief in himseIf/herseIf and lhe
slralegy. A recenl Morningslar sludy
found lhal aboul haIf of lhe muluaI fund
managers lracked have NON| of lheir
ovn money in lhe funds lhey manage.
Z||O. Comare lhis lo uffell, vho has
aImosl his enlire nel vorlh invesled in
erkshire Halhavay. In facl I can'l even
lhink of a singIe one of lhe greals vho
didn'l have a subslanliaI orlion of his
or her nel vorlh invesled in lheir ovn
fund. IairhoIme, LongIeaf, Hussman
funds aII have manager inveslmenls in
lheir funds lo lhe lune of lensif nol
hundredsof miIIions of doIIars.

Do you vanl a manager vhose allilude
is, Do as I say, nol as I do` Or, do you
vanl a manager vho essenliaIIy says,
I'm going lo slick by your side during
lhe us and dovns, vhalever my
erformance, ve are going lo exerience
il logelher. This is no-brainer, isn'l il`

II it's sn grcat, why arcn't mnrc pcnp!c
va!uc invcstnrs?

One reason is Iack of conviclion, il look
me 10 years of exerience and sludy,
reading lhe righl books and going

7
lhrough more lhan five years of osl-
graduale educalion (a Iol of lhal lime I
senl Iearning hov nci lo invesl) lo
deveIo an absoIule conviclion lhal
vaIue invesling vas lhe righl vay lo do
lhings.lhrough and lhrough.

Anolher reason is Iack of alience. We
Iive in an inslanl gralificalion vorId,
vhen a orlfoIio undererforms lhe
saiIor indexes, ve vanl our managers
lo go do somelhing aboul ildo
somelhing differenl, somelhing
aggressive so ve can slarl vinning
again. UnforlunaleIy, inleIIigenl
invesling isn'l foolbaII. Il's nol a sorl
vhere a vin aII lhe lime, al any cosl
allilude gels you anyvhere.

Tn invcst intc!!igcnt!y ynu havc tn
a!!nw Inr thc spccu!atinn harcs tn
nutrun ynur Iundamcnta!!y snund
turt!cs.nItcn. During lhe secuIalive
lech slock suer-bubbIe, many
managers, even some vilh some Iong-
lerm successfuI lrack records, vere fired
(onIy lo be scooed u by smarler
firms). Iven uffell vas allacked in lhe
ress as a granda vho |usl didn'l
undersland lhe nev economy. Il onIy
look unliI 2003 for uffell lo be lhe one
Iefl Iaughing. Iasy lo see in hindsighl,
bul for every fund manager vilh a boss
or inveslor vondering if he or she vas
doing lhe righl lhing, il seemed Iike an
elernily before vaIue inveslors vere abIe
lo redeem lhemseIves.

Slaying lhis course can lake a ainfuIIy
Iong lime. During lhe lech bubbIe, lhis
look as Iong as Iong as five or six years.
ul as }eremy Granlham said, in vhal
has since become one of my ersonaI
favorile quoles:

"I'd rathcr !nsc ha!I nI my c!icnts than
ha!I my nI c!icnts' mnncy."

So vhy nol secuIale and svilch over lo
vaIue invesling |usl before lhings lurn
sour` uffell has a good anaIogy for lhis
loo. To arahrase him: Il is a Iol Iike
CindereIIa al lhe baII.everyone is
dancing and having fun and lhey aII
lhink lhey're going lo gel oul lvo
minules before midnighl.onIy lhere
are no cIocks on lhe vaII.

IinaIIy, vaIue inveslors are usuaIIy earIy
in lheir urchases as lhey invesl vhen
vaIualions faII lo lheir largel rices. Of
course, manic-deressive markels
usuaIIy reverl beyond lhe mean, causing
vaIue inveslors lo Iook dumb for a
vhiIe.

Dncs va!uc invcsting sti!! wnrk?

Il is inleresling lo nole lhal in any given
year (or lvo or lhree years, for lhal
maller) vaIue inveslors may nol be al
lhe lo of anyone's erformance Iisl. ul
if you Iook al lhe mosl recenl vinner
and four runner-us for Morningslar's
Domeslic Manager of lhe Decade,
four of lhem vouId consider lhemseIves
vaIue inveslors (lhe fiflh may loo, I |usl
don'l knov his hiIosohy veII). Iven
uffell and Munger, vho manage an
excessiveIy difficuIl amounl of money,
sliII managed lo comound lheir cailaI
al an imressive rale during lhe firsl
decade of lhis cenlury.


8
What va!uc invcsting mcans tn ynu
If you are a do-il-yourseIfer, you can use
lhese allribules for vaIue invesling as a
generaI framevork lo heI you ick lhe
kind of managers you vouId need for
cerlain orlions of your orlfoIio. Ior
examIe, if you are Iooking al a muluaI
fund in vhich lhe highesl veighled
slock is 1.8% (lheorelicaIIy, lhe highesl-
conviclion ick) for lhe fund, lhen run.
If you see a manager on TV and he says
he's invesled in a comany for lhe Iong
lerm bul lhen defines lhe Iong lerm
as 12 monlhs (I acluaIIy heard lhis a fev
days ago!) lhen run. If you find a
manager vho has no ersonaI
inveslmenls in lhe fund he manages
lhen run.

If you're nol a do-il yourseIfer, lhen find
yourseIf an advisor vho beIieves in lhe
vaIue hiIosohy. When inlervieving
an advisor ask lhem vhal hiIosohy
lhey subscribe lo and comare lhal lo
lhe hiIosohy of lhe greal vaIue
inveslors.

IinaIIy, lhe mosl imorlanl lhing you
can do is undersland lhe vhy of
erformance. Whelher you are a do-il-
yourseIfer or are going lo hire someone
lo do lhis for you, lhere ui|| be eriods
of undererformance. Underslanding
vhy a manager or orlfoIio is
undererforming is crilicaI. If you have
hired an advisor and lhal erson can'l
leII you vhy one of lhe funds in your
orlfoIio is undererforming, lhal
robabIy isn'l a very good sign.

Remember lhal lhere are erfeclIy good
reasons lo undererform, |usl as lhere
are bad reasons lo oulerform. Ior
examIe, Ioading u on slocks in an
induslry lhal has slrong momenlum,
bul high vaIualions and bad
fundamenlaIs is a bad reason lo
oulerform. Some good reasons lo
undererform are nol arlaking in a
secuIalive rise in an induslry or lhe
overaII markel. Somelimes greal
inveslmenls |usl don'l move for a Iong
vhiIe. These are aII good reasons lo Iag
eers.

I oflen lhink aboul lhe ercenlage of
eoIe vho, if on a goIf course vilh }ack
NickIaus or on a baskelbaII courl vilh
MichaeI }ordan vouId ignore a iece of
advice. Yel, |usl Iike lhese suer
alhIeles, ve have lhis greal ooI of
suer-inveslors, incIuding: uffell,
Munger, KIarman, GreenbIall, Iinhorn,
Graham, Havkins, Iabrai, SchIoss,
Whilman, IveiIIard, Cunniff |usl lo
name a fev, vho aII share a simiIar
hiIosohy and yel lhe ma|orily of lhe
vorId chooses lo ignore lhem.

As uffell said, Il baffIes us hov many
eoIe knov of en Graham, bul so fev
foIIov. We leII our rinciIes freeIy and
vrile aboul lhem exlensiveIy in our
annuaI reorls. They are easy lo Iearn.
They shouId be easy lo foIIov. ul lhe
onIy lhing anyone vanls lo knov is,
'Whal are ve buying loday` Like
Graham, ve are videIy recognized, bul
lhe Ieasl foIIoved. Ignnrc at ynur nwn
risk!





9

ABOUT LOIC LUKE LEMENER, CFA

, MBA, CFP

,
Loic LeMener is a Managing Principal o KPLL Priate \ealth in Dallas, 1exas. le specializes in
helping owners o priately held businesses and other aluent amilies strategically reposition business
and personal assets to help achiee long-term objecties. Key acets o his practice include stress-
testing strategies, business succession planning, estate planning, tax reduction strategies and charitable
strategies. Loic holds an M.B.A. rom Southern Methodist Uniersity and a B.S. in linance rom the
Uniersity o Colorado. le is also a leel III candidate or the prestigious Chartered linancial Analyst
designation. Luke has been quoted in national publications such as Barron`s.
Loic LeMener, ClA

, MBA, ClP

is a registered representatie
o Lincoln linancial Adisors Corp.

Securities and inestment adisory serices oered through
Lincoln linancial Adisors Corp., a broker,dealer ,member
SIPC, and registered inestment adisor. Insurance oered
through Lincoln ailiates and other ine companies.

1his inormation should not be construed as legal or tax adice.
\ou may want to consult a tax adisor regarding this material as it
relates to your personal circumstances. CRN201011-2048110

LeMenerKPLL.com
KPLL Private Wealth
J49JJ Quorum Drive, Suite 300
Dallas, 1X 7S2S4-7002
Phone 972 36J-3839
Iax 972 960-6847