In this podcast, Motley Fool analyst David Meier and host Mary Long discuss:
- Target's off-the-mark results.
- Lessons from TJX Companies' under-the-radar CEO.
- What caused David to do a double-take when listening to Palo Alto Networks' earnings call.
Then, author Morgan Housel joins Motley Fool Chief Investment Officer Andy Cross for a conversation about investment decision-making and the psychology of spending money.
To catch full episodes of all The Motley Fool's free podcasts, check out our podcast center. When you're ready to invest, check out this top 10 list of stocks to buy.
A full transcript is below.
This podcast was recorded on May 21, 2025.
Mary Long: The retailers are in. You're listening to Motley Fool Money. I'm Mary Long joined on this fine Wednesday morning by Mr. David Meier. David, thanks for being here.
David Meier: Thank you for having me. Good to see you again.
Mary Long: Good to see you, too. It's always good to see you. We're going to kick things off today with a look at some retailers that reported this morning. We'll start with Target. They saw comparable sales drop nearly 4%. Management lowered guidance for the full fiscal year, partially as a result. What else in these results stuck out to you, David?
David Meier: Yeah, I'm just going right back to the second one that you talked about, which is the reduction in full year sales growth. This is actually a pretty big deal. At the start of the year, first go around, management said, Hey, we think we're going to see top line growth of 1% and now they say, Hey, we're going to see a low single digit decline. First of all, it's gone from up to down, which is never good. And it's also gone from a number that we're confident in to a range something. Low single digit can mean almost anything. What that communicates to me is there's definitely some worry on the part of this management team and then the other thing that stuck out was, despite the fact that the overall comp store sales growth dropped, the digital business is performing well. It's an increase in 4.7%. That's not necessarily surprising. This is a trend that we're seeing a lot of retailers. A lot of consumers find these services very useful. I know our household pretty much does not go into a brick and mortar store anymore. We get everything delivered to us almost and so it's not surprising to see that business doing well, even if it is still a very small part of the business.
Mary Long: You mentioned that you're interpreting some worry on behalf of the management team. They actually put some reasons behind that worry. You've got CEO Brian Cornell blaming this larger, broader sales slump on a couple of things, declining consumer confidence, tariffs, of course, and uncertainty about the future of the economy. You've also got the impact of boycotts, targeting Target for its back and forth on DEI and corporate diversity policies. Notably, retail is a cyclical industry, and only one of these issues that Cornell names the DEI kerfuffle is actually target specific. Other retailers are dealing with consumer confidence issues, tariffs, uncertainty, etc. How heavily do you think these various headwinds impact the long term Target story?
David Meier: So a very good question. I will start with the DEI kerfuffle which is a great word, by the way, and say, I don't know how that's going to impact things going forward. It's influx and I don't think, based on what I've read, that the management has even tried to quantify it yet. It's there. Obviously, boycotts, in either direction. Not a good thing, but they are addressing it the best they can, so I don't know how long that headwind might last. As for the rest, they are definitely near term headwinds. Consumer confidence is falling. This is real, and you're right. It impacts everybody. Tariffs are real, uncertainty, like what is the possibility that we could see a recession in the United States as a result of changing policies and changing consumer confidence. We don't know, but those risks are real and again, you're right, across the board, everybody faces them. We'll continue to see but it's very clear based on the top line guidance that management is saying we're seeing some impact in our business specifically as a result of these conditions.
Mary Long: Tariffs are real, but importantly, they haven't yet trickled down to affect in store prices. So Walmart said it would be raising prices in response to costs incurred by tariffs. Target's got a gross margin for the first quarter of about 28%. Considering that and the fact that its sales were already down this past quarter, what is Target's best move when it comes to tariffs when they actually do hit in store prices? Do you hold them steady? Do you raise prices? Do you absorb additional costs and let loose some sales to just get people in the door? If you're in Brian Cornell's shoes, what are you doing, David?
David Meier: Yeah, another great question. Here's the thing. I think it has to be handled on a case by case basis based on the sales data that they have associated with the products that are impacted. Unfortunately, there's no single prescription about the best way to deal with these tariffs. It could be any of those things that you talked about. We could raise prices a little, maybe we could take a margin hit a little. It depends on how impactful that those sales can be. The other thing that they could do is they could actually try to find source substitute products. Hey, we can't sell this product, you know, above a certain price, and it's not good for us to eat the tariff in terms of seeing a margin reduction, we got to go see if we can source it from somewhere else. Just real quick, for just a little context, management did say that about 30% of its products come from China. In the country which is getting the most headlines, 30%, that's actually not as high as I thought it might be. I was figuring it was maybe along the lines of 50. But 30% is also impactful.
Mary Long: Let's zoom out and think about the stock chart and Target's performance over the past five years, because we're long term investors we like to think in these 5, 10 year increments. Over the past five years, you've got the S&P 500 up nearly 100%. Target, by comparison, down by over 20%. What needs to happen for Target to buck the trend of the past five years and actually outperform the S&P over the course of the next five?
David Meier: By the way, I love you calling it Target. When my parents lived in the state of Washington, we used to call it Target Nord. It was the Target that was north of the city of Seattle. Anyway.
Mary Long: So classy.
David Meier: I think the prescription is unfortunately, very simple but very difficult to execute, and that is Target has to get the right merchandise, at the right price, for the right customers. Essentially, that's what retailing is. That's all they ever want to do. Interestingly, one of the things that it's actually doing right now and plans to invest heavily into this is to try to become more efficient across every facet of its business. That's something that every retailer tries to do in terms of continuous improvement, but they realize, Hey, we have to step up our efforts here. The other thing that it needs to do is continue to lean into the digital order and fulfillment capabilities. I think this is the wave of the future.
Mary Long: We'll pivot to another retailer that's nicely outperformed the S&P in that same five year time frame, and that perhaps has done that because it has gotten right, this holy grail of retail. This idea of getting the right merchandise in the right place at the right time. That company is TJX Companies, so they're the parent to TJ Max, Marshalls, HomeGoods, Cierra, a number of other treasure hunt style discount stores. When it comes to discretionary items, I would argue that this is the company that is really a direct competitor to Target. A lot of people I feel like to make the comparison between Target and Walmart as these big retailers. But Target has a treasure hunt style feel to it when you do go into the brick and mortar store, and TJX certainly has that in spades, as well. All that said, yet in this most recent quarter, TJX saw comparable sales grow 5%. I talked earlier about Target seeing comparable sales decline. What's TJX got that Target doesn't?
David Meier: I think it's pretty simple right now, TJX companies has customers that want to and continue to come back to the store and do it frequently. On the conference call, and I believe this was for US TJ Max stores, said that they had a 3% same store sales increase, and that was entirely driven by an increase in transactions. Let's think about that for one sec. That implies that maybe there was very little price increases so customers know that if they go there, they're still going to get the bargains that they intend to. They go in there with that intent. I'm getting a good product at a very good price that just may not be "suitable" for a department store. As a result, they're deciding, Hey, I will buy more things from TJX Companies because they have what I want at the price that I want it at the time that I need it. Yeah, it was an impressive quarter to say the least from TJX.
Mary Long: I like comparing these two companies, Target and TJX because I think it makes really clear that Target's almost between two very different paths. On the one path is this digital sales e-commerce route that we've already talked about and that you've highlighted as potentially being the future for the company. But on the other hand, you have this treasure hunt style brick and mortar path that TJX has in a lot of ways perfected that Target has elements of, but we're not seeing them being able to execute on that as much recently. Do you think the path forward is, Hey, target lean in to the digital path.
David Meier: I do. I think there's one other thing that's a little difficult for Target right now, in contrast to TJX and that is Target has tried to differentiate itself by being let's call it a step up from Walmart. It's going after a little bit of a higher demographic and if consumer confidence is waning, customers don't trade up. They trade down. TJX also is unfortunate right now, but they might have this little caught in the middle type of problem as well, meaning the customers that they used to serve very well might not be coming in as frequently because they're saying, Hey, I need to save some money or I need to cut back on some spending. Maybe I don't need to buy everything I used to buy, and that usually means going someplace else.
Mary Long: I'll continue down this comparison by taking a look at the two different leaders of these companies. So Target CEO Brian Cornell, that's a name that tends to loom pretty large, get a lot of attention in the business world. My sense is that far fewer people are familiar with the name Ernie Herman. He is the CEO of TJX. He has been since 2016 and yet, despite this distance in fame and recognition, TJX under Herman's tenure has far outperformed Target's under Cornell's. Any advice that you think Mr. Cornell could stand to take from Mr. Herman?
David Meier: Yeah, I think it's the idea of focusing hard on operations. Let's take a quick peek at TJX's margins. One of the things that they've been doing is steadily improving over the last 5-7 years as sales have increased can't say the same thing is happening at Target. Those increases have led to increases in cash flow. That cash flow gives the company like TJX options about where it wants to allocate that capital so it's opened new stores. It's been repurchasing shares when it thinks they're attractive. It's been growing its dividend. It's a little difficult, but TJX knows its niche, and it knows how to operate in its niche, and it doesn't have the quote unquote mass appeal problem that Target is trying to solve and so I think it gets back to, Hey, you got to know who you are and you got to know you just have to be able to execute better than better than your competitors, which is exactly what TJX has done over the years.
Mary Long: Yeah, as you've said, is a deceptively simple task. It's challenging to say that difficult to execute on. We'll move on to Palo Alto Network, so totally separate from the retail industry. This is a cybersecurity company that David is very near and dear to your heart. I know they reported better-than-anticipated earnings and revenue for the last quarter. Sales growing 15% year over year, but net income falling by about 16 million or $0.02 a share. Wall Street seemingly not loving this as the stock is down about 6%. Last I checked this morning. You follow this company really closely. What in these results are you paying closest attention to?
David Meier: One reason I think actually the stock is down is because there was maybe a little bit of worry about remaining performance obligations. Basically, these are hey, think of it, the backlog. These are contracts that we're signing. It came in a little bit lower than expectations, and I'm sorry, the guidance was a little bit lower than analysts were expecting. That might have a little bit to do with it, but I will say this, I wasn't paying as much attention to the financials. As I was to what the CEO was saying about AI. AI obviously been in the news for every company, and the CEO said, Hey, data is massively important. Well, no. We understand that. But Palo Alto has been shifting in that direction for the last few years. It's why the company has really pushed for Cloud based services, as opposed to on premise based services. What's more, he mentioned that when Palo Alto can see all of an enterprise's security related data, it actually makes AI more impactful because it gets to train off of a larger dataset as opposed to looking at one segment within security, like identity security or mail security. If you're trying to sell large enterprises on a one stop shop solution, this is exactly what you need to be doing. I really appreciated the 10,000 foot level view that the CEO was giving.
Mary Long: Management did not buy back any stock this quarter, though, the CFO did underscore that the company's buyback strategy "remains opportunistic." Palo Alto Networks is trading at about 12 times forward enterprise value to sales. At what price would you, David Meier, big fan of this company, consider the stock an opportunistic buy?
David Meier: All right, so a quick editorial here.
Mary Long: Yeah.
David Meier: I did a double take when I heard that and I was like, Wait, did I hear that correctly? I literally rewound it, and I was like, you didn't buy back any shares. Your multiples were lower. Right now, the forward enterprise value to sales ratio is about 12. Earlier in the year, it was sitting at 10. That's significant. Now, there's can be all sorts of reasons why. But I just I had to do the double tape. I would say this based on the growth opportunities that Palo Alto has ahead, based on the technology innovations that the company is investing in, that it's seeing in terms of the growth of its new products, I would think anything around 10 times forward sales would be reasonable and obviously, the lower the better.
Mary Long: David Meier, always a pleasure having you on. Thanks so much for joining us to chat about retailers and cybersecurity company today.
David Meier: Thanks for having me.
Mary Long: For most skills, there's a direct and positive relationship between time spent doing that skill and your results. The more time you spend at the gym, the stronger you get. Morgan Housel argues that the opposite is true when it comes to investing. Up next, Motley Fool Chief Investment Officer, Andy Cross, talks with best-selling author Morgan Housel, in a segment of a conversation that originally aired on our live stream Fool 24.
Andy Cross: Morgan, you've written about reasonable being greater than rational, and the reasons we make silly or dumb investing mistakes, why do we do it? When you boil it down all of your history, all of your experience, all your knowledge, what are the real reasons why we make not smart investing or money decisions and how can we not do that better going forward?
Morgan Housel: One thing that's hard about investing is it's one of the very few fields where the harder you try, the worse you are likely to do. That's the case for 95% of investors. The more effort you put into it, the worse you're going to do. Why that's so hard for people is because most fields are not like that. If you want to get in better physical shape, go to the gym for more hours. If you want to get good at piano, practice piano for more hours. Like, most fields have a very high correlation between effort and results, and investing just doesn't. That is so counterintuitive for people. This is why some of the people who do the worst at investing are very educated, very intelligent, very high IQ people. Because those are the ones who say, if I just try a little bit harder, if I just turn a couple more knobs and pull a few more levers, I should get better results, and it's usually not the case. We just having a diverse portfolio of good companies that you buy and hold onto forever, it's so boring. It's so basic, but it absolutely works is it's not intellectually stimulating enough for people. I think investing is a dangerous place to be if you need it for intellectual stimulation.
Now, I follow markets every day. I love reading about markets. But if you wake up every morning and you're like, What can I sell today? What can I tweak this and trade this and get ahead before earnings and react to the economic news? It's a very dangerous place for high IQ people to do that. That's one reason. The other is nobody should pretend that saving for their retirement or their kids' education is not emotional. It absolutely is. I've never met any parent who is unemotional about their children's future and so whenever you're making very big decisions where the stakes are very high, and there's a lot of uncertainty, and there's also a lot of bad actors in the industry, of course, it's going to be a case where, like, people are not thinking about this with a fully rational mechanical mind. I've told a story before. I'm sure this is true for so many other people out there.
My wife and I were buying our first house 10 years ago, we found a house on Zillow, and we were like, Oh, that one looks pretty good and we started driving to the open house, and we're like, this is just information gathering. We're not doing anything big here. We're not making any decisions. We're just going to go check it out. We pulled into the driveway, and my wife goes, Oh, my God, I love it and at that point, all rational thinking was out the door. That was just pure emotion at that point, because buying a house is not just a spreadsheet. You're thinking about Christmas morning with your children and barbecues with your friends. We shouldn't pretend that that is just a financial decision. It's not and a lot of investing is like that. Most investing revolves around retirement and putting your kids through college. Those are the two big buckets that drive the majority of investing decisions and both of those are such major life decisions that it's hard for otherwise, very calm, cool, rational people to make really calm, cool, rational decisions.
Andy Cross: Morgan, so for analysts, one of my favorite stories with Warren Buffett is when someone asks, how do I become a better analyst, I think I'm paraphrasing here. He said, Read more annual reports. Where do I start? He said, we'll start with the As and go all the way to the Zs. Clearly, a gentleman who spent, as you said yourself, hours and hours, days and days, years and decades just doing what he's done. I think that is on the one side of the spectrum. That uniqueness is exceptionally rare. For most average people thinking about money and business, the parable you talk about about trying the harder you try, the worse you will perform. I think that's what you're speaking to really everybody, but certainly there are the rare people out there like Warren Buffett.
Morgan Housel: Yeah, I think he actually does fit the mold of effort versus rewards because, yes, he was reading annual reports, 24 hours a day for 80 years, but there are a lot of years where he would only make three or four investments so he was not emotional in the sense that he was waking up every morning, reacting, Oh, the Dow's down today. I need to go make a decision in my portfolio. Even though he was constantly immersing himself in this information, he was not getting emotional about it. The other thing that his biographer, Al Schroeder once talked about was Buffett and Munger are or were not a emotional. They were counter-emotional. That when the market was melting down, they weren't unemotional about it. They got really excited. They were absolutely giddy and their focus would increase when the market was crashing. They were unique personalities. I think if you can be unemotional about things, that's better than being emotional about things. But when you're really, like, a supercharged investor is when you're counter-emotional about these things.
Andy Cross: Let's talk a little bit about your next book, which is called the Art of Spending Money. I think it publishes, as I mentioned before in October. Share some insights into why you thought writing the third book now in 2025, going through so many different periods of investing and money, issues that we're facing today, but give a little preview of the book.
Morgan Housel: Well, the Psychology of Money is mostly about investing, which is a big part of what I liked and enjoyed and have studied for the last 20 years. But there are lots of people who invest. More than half of all Americans own stocks. But spending is something that is completely universal to everybody and just like in the psychology of money, where even if you're a teenager novice or a season hedge fund manager, a lot of the behavioural learnings and lessons apply to everybody. I think the same is true for spending, whether you are on minimum wage or a billionaire. A lot of the psychology of spending around envy and greed and getting people's attention, attention-seeking behavior, wanting people to pay attention to you, a lot of the behaviors of spending are universal no matter how much money you make. There are so many different stories to talk about in terms of the psychology of spending. I make the point in the first page on the book, I'm not going to teach you how to spend or tell you how to spend because everybody's different. Like, the spending that makes me happy might not make you happy, and vice versa, everyone's different. But the behaviors around envy and greed and attention tend to be very universal across cultures, across ages, across incomes.
It was cool to just take a step back and think about spending not from a lecturing point of view of stop buying lattes and save more money and experience versus things. That's all been tried. That's been played out by many other writers. I just wanted to look at the psychology of spending. Like what's going on in your head when you make a decision with what to buy, the house you buy, the clothes you buy, the car you buy the jewelries, you buy the vacations that you take. There's always more going on than just, Oh, this is going to make me happy. Some of the stuff will make you happy, but a lot of it, there's so much social signaling and social aspiration and you getting envious of other people and you hoping that other people are paying attention to you, it was cool to take a deeper look at that psychology of spending.
Andy Cross: Was there any sneak peek you can give us in something that you just learned that was a surprise to you when you were digging into how people are spending their money and how they're feeling about spending their money without giving the book away?
Morgan Housel: Well, this is minor, but I love this little anecdote. I read the biography of Harvey Firestone from Firestone Tire. He was the Tire Magnet 120 years ago or so and he wrote a biography, and he was very open about his life and his relationship with money. He was, of course, very, very rich, the equivalent of a multi billionaire and he had this diary entry that he included in his biography, where he said, for reasons I don't understand, every single person who I know who gets rich buys a house that is way too big for them that they end up hating. This giant mansion that they buy is just enormous liability. It's such a pain in the butt to take care of. It's way too big. They don't like it, but they all still do it. Every single one of them does it. He says, I don't understand why. He says, every single person who I know who is rich, they buy a mansion and they were happier in the smaller house. They hate the mansion, but they all do it and they refuse to give it up.
He makes this point that he's like, there's such a strong pull to show off your wealth, even when it makes your life worse off and he goes into detail about why he thinks that is. I thought that was such a refreshing statement because I think it's true for a lot of people that a lot of wealthy people, you can define wealth, however you want, start buying toys and cars and clothes and taking vacations that may or may not make them happier and actually might make them less happy. That what they actually want is a simple life, like, a life that's simple so that they can enjoy, being who they are and spending time with people that they enjoy. But there's such a strong social pool to make a complicated life with big fancy expensive things that might actually leave you worse off.
Mary Long: As always, people on the program may have interest in the stocks they talk about, and Motley Fool may have formal recommendations for or against, so do not buy or sell stocks based solely on what you hear. All personal finance content follows Motley Fool editorial standards and are not approved by advertisers. Advertisements are sponsored content and provided for informational purposes only to see our full advertising disclosure, please check out our show notes. The Motley Fool Money team, I'm Mary Long. Thanks for listening. We'll see you tomorrow.
