Mistakes and Correction
Admitting mistakes is the hardest thing, but not correcting after discovering an error is the greatest mistake.
📌 Concept Analysis
Mistakes and correction = Mistakes are inevitable, but persisting in error after discovering it is the real mistake; the speed at which you admit errors determines the size of your losses.
You’re playing golf and hit the ball into the water. That stroke is already lost—you have two choices: regret this stroke and affect your next one; or accept it and focus on how to play the next stroke. In Duan Yongping’s investment philosophy, “mistakes” themselves aren’t the problem—“not admitting mistakes” is fatal. The difference between a good golfer and a bad one isn’t who never makes mistakes but whose error rate is lower and who can recover faster from mistakes.
💡 Core Understanding
1. Mistakes are inevitable—the difference between masters and ordinary people lies in lower error rates, not never making mistakes.
This is the investment philosophy Duan Yongping distilled from golf. Buffett bought many wrong stocks, but his overall error rate was extremely low—“When investing in stocks, we expect every investment to succeed. In our 38 years of operating Berkshire, the ratio of profitable investments to losing investments was approximately 100:1.” This is the true moat.
2. Not correcting after discovering an error is the biggest mistake—“sunk cost” is the most dangerous psychological trap.
This describes Duan Yongping’s most common error pattern—because large costs have already been invested, people are unwilling to admit mistakes and stop losses. The core of doing the right thing is: correct immediately upon discovery—“whatever the cost, it’s the minimum cost.”
3. Good corporate culture is an error-correction system that enables companies to discover errors early and correct them quickly.
One important dimension by which Duan Yongping evaluates companies is their error-correction ability: “It seems companies like Google have much stronger error-correction capabilities than those like Panasonic—they adjust much faster.” Companies with weak correction abilities often persist in directional errors once made.
4. In investing, admitting mistakes concretely means: discovering you bought wrong—sell immediately regardless of how much you’ve lost.
An important trigger condition for selling logic is: discovering that the original buying judgment was wrong (not because stock prices fell, but because the company itself has problems). Continuing to hold at this point isn’t long-termism; it’s using “long-term” as cover for unwillingness to admit mistakes.
🛠 How to Practice
Distinguish between two types of errors:
- Execution-level errors (errors during “doing things right”): These are part of the learning process—tolerable; key is learning from them and reducing probability. Like occasionally hitting a golf ball into water—it’s normal.
- Directional-level errors (errors in “doing the right thing”): These must be corrected immediately with zero tolerance. Like discovering you’ve taken the wrong road—you must turn back immediately; don’t continue just because “I’ve come so far.”
Investment error-correction checklist:
Reassess whether you bought wrong when discovering:
- Company’s corporate culture has fundamental problems (not short-term performance fluctuations)
- Company’s business model has fundamentally changed
- Original buying rationale no longer holds
Note: Stock price decline itself isn’t a correction signal—changes in company fundamentals are.
📖 Case Analysis
Buffett’s investment in Energy Future Holdings (2012): Admitting errors without delay
Buffett invested about $2 billion in power company Energy Future Holdings, later facing risk of total loss. Duan Yongping commented: “That means potentially losing about 1% of market cap…relative to what old Buffett could earn investing these years, this really doesn’t amount to much. It’s like hitting one bad shot in golf, but overall score remains excellent. As long as you play, mistakes are inevitable—winners are those with low error rates.” This is a positive example of “mistakes are inevitable but what matters is the final score.”
Source: Investment Logic, 2012-02-28
Tesla (before 2019): Made money but later discovered flawed logic
When asked “Have you ever made trades where you made money but afterward discovered the facts or logic were wrong?” the first example Duan Yongping gave was Tesla: “My Tesla case is typical.” He made considerable money on Tesla but ultimately sold everything because he “couldn’t understand” it, admitting his original buying logic was wrong. This case demonstrates: good outcomes don’t equal good decisions—using results to validate decisions is dangerous.
Source: Business Logic, 2018-10
⚠️ Common Misconceptions
-
❌ “I’ve lost so much—let me wait and see” — This is the sunk cost trap. “Many people commit the foolish error of continuing to wait—I’ve already invested tens of millions here, how can I stop now?” Amounts already lost are history and cannot justify continued holding.
-
❌ “Good companies don’t make mistakes” — “When good companies make mistakes, they’re often buying opportunities.” Good companies make mistakes too—the difference is they rarely make fundamental principle errors and have strong correction capabilities. Equating “good companies” with “companies that never err” causes many missed buying opportunities.
-
❌ “Admitting mistakes shows weakness” — Duan Yongping repeatedly emphasizes that admitting mistakes is the hardest but also most important thing. “The Japanese refusal to admit mistakes actually resembles us somewhat.” Not admitting mistakes isn’t strength—it’s what turns small mistakes into big ones.
💬 Original Quotes
“The difference between masters and other players lies in low error rates, not how many good shots they hit.” (Source: Investment Logic, 2011-09-07)
“As long as you’re playing, mistakes are inevitable—winners are those with low error rates.” (Source: Investment Logic, 2012-02-28)
“We’ve avoided many errors; lower mistake rates mean higher success probabilities. My investing works the same way. Like golf—you pursue overall score and enjoyment, not hole-in-one.” (Source: Business Logic)
“Good corporate culture isn’t omnipotent, but it helps companies avoid fundamental principle errors and enables early error discovery.” (Source: Business Logic, 2011-02-18)
“There’s no perfect golf, no perfect investing—it’s the same with life.” (Source: Investment Logic, 2012-12-20)
🔗 Related Nodes
Upstream Concepts (prerequisites for understanding this concept): Doing the Right Thing · Stop Doing List · Corporate Culture
Downstream Concepts (conclusions derived from this): Selling Logic · Ordinary Mind · Long-termism
Related Company Cases Alibaba (Wei Zhe incident) · GE (admitting errors after financial crisis) · Tesla (made money but logic was flawed)
Related People Duan Yongping · Buffett
错误与纠错
认错是最难的事，但发现错了不改才是最大的错误
📌 概念解析
错误与纠错 = 犯错不可避免，但发现错了之后继续坚持才是真正的错误；认错的速度决定了损失的大小。
你打高尔夫，把球打进了水里。这一杆已经没了，你有两个选择：懊恼这一杆，影响下一杆；或者接受它，专注于下一杆怎么打。段永平的投资哲学里，“错误”本身不是问题，“不认错”才是致命的。好的球手和差的球手，差别不在于谁从不犯错，而在于谁的错误率低、谁能更快从错误中恢复。
💡 核心理解
1. 犯错不可避免，高手和普通人的差别在于错误率低，而不是从不犯错。
这是段永平从 golf 中提炼出的投资哲学。巴菲特买错过很多股票，但他的整体错误率极低——“在投资股票时，我们预期每一笔投资都会成功，在我们经营伯克希尔的38年中，投资获利的个案和投资亏损的个案比例约为100:1。“这才是真正的护城河。
2. 发现错了不改，才是最大的错误——“沉没成本”是最危险的心理陷阱。
这是段永平描述的最常见的错误模式——因为已经投入了大量成本，就不愿意承认错误、停止损失。做对的事的核心就是：发现错了就立刻改，“不管多大的代价都是最小的代价”。
3. 好的企业文化是一个纠错系统，能让公司及早发现错误、快速改正。
段永平评价一家公司，很重要的一个维度就是它的纠错能力——“看起来 Google 这类公司的纠错能力要比松下这类公司强很多，调整起来快很多。“纠错能力弱的公司，一旦犯了方向性错误，往往会一错到底。
4. 在投资中，认错的具体表现是：发现买错了，立刻卖出，不管亏了多少。
卖出逻辑的一个重要触发条件就是：发现当初的买入判断是错的（不是因为股价跌，而是公司本身有问题）。这时候继续持有，不是长期主义，而是用”长期”掩盖不愿认错的心理。
🛠 如何实践
区分两种错误：
- 执行层面的错误（“把事情做对”过程中的错误）：这类错误是学习过程的一部分，可以容忍，关键是从中学习、降低概率。就像打高尔夫偶尔把球打进水里，是正常的。
- 方向层面的错误（“做对的事”的错误）：这类错误必须立刻纠正，零容忍。就像发现走错路了，必须立刻掉头，不能因为”已经走了这么远”就继续走。
投资中的纠错清单：
发现以下情况时，应该重新评估是否买错了：
注意：股价下跌本身不是纠错的信号，公司基本面变化才是。
📖 案例拆解
巴菲特投资 Energy Future Holdings（2012年）：认错不拖延
巴菲特投资约 20 亿美元的电力公司 Energy Future Holdings，后来面临血本无归的风险。段永平点评：“就是说相当于 1% 的市值可能没有了……相对于这几年老巴投资能赚的钱而言，这个实在是不算什么。有点像一场 golf 里打了个坏球，但总成绩还是很好。只要下场打球，错误是不可避免的，赢家都是那些错误率低的人。“这是对”错误不可避免，但总成绩才是关键”的正面示范。
来源：投资逻辑篇，2012-02-28
特斯拉（2019年前）：赚了钱，但事后发现逻辑搞错了
段永平在被问到”你有没有做过这样的交易：赚了钱，事后却发现事实或逻辑搞错了”时，第一个举的例子就是特斯拉：“我的特斯拉就是典型哈。“他在特斯拉上赚了不少钱，但最终因为”看不懂”而全部放弃，并承认当初买入时逻辑就是错的。这个案例说明：结果好不等于决策对，用结果来验证决策是危险的。
来源：商业逻辑篇，2018-10
⚠️ 常见误区
-
❌ “亏了这么多了，再等等看” — 这是沉没成本陷阱。“多人都犯继续等下去的愚蠢的错误，这个事情我已经投入了几千万呀，怎么停的下来？“已经亏损的金额是历史，不能成为继续持有的理由。
-
❌ “好公司不会犯错” — “好公司犯错误时往往是买入的机会。“好公司也会犯错，区别在于它们犯原则性大错的概率低，且纠错能力强。把”好公司”等同于”不犯错的公司”，会错过很多买入机会。
-
❌ “认错就是软弱” — 段永平多次强调，认错是最难的事，但也是最重要的事。“日本人死不认错这点倒是和我们有点像。“不认错不是强大，而是把小错误变成大错误的根源。
💬 原文金句
“高手和其他选手的差别就在错误率低而不是能打出多少好球来。“（来源：投资逻辑篇，2011-09-07）
“只要下场打球，错误是不可避免的，赢家都是那些错误率低的人。“（来源：投资逻辑篇，2012-02-28）
“我们少犯了许多错误，失误率少成功的机会就大，我做投资也是这样。如打高尔夫，你追求的是整体成绩，是乐趣，而不是一竿进洞。“（来源：商业逻辑篇）
“好的企业文化不是万能的，但能让公司少犯原则性错误，而且可以让公司及早发现错误。“（来源：商业逻辑篇，2011-02-18）
“没有完美的 golf，也没有完美的投资，人生也一样。“（来源：投资逻辑篇，2012-12-20）
🔗 关联节点
上游概念（理解这个概念的前提）： 做对的事 · Stop Doing List · 企业文化
下游概念（由此推导出的结论）： 卖出逻辑 · 平常心 · 长期主义