In 2024, I began reading a book every week. I wanted to share what I’d read, so I posted a recap of my 2024 reading stats and lessons learned (see here). I was frustrated by how hard it was to share a list of all the book titles (see here), so I created a page about each book I read in 2024 (see here). I wanted to replace the Google Sheet I use to track all my reading, so I created a searchable library of all the books I’ve read (see here). I update it weekly.

Last year, 2025, was year two of consistently reading a book every week, and I want to share a recap of my stats and lessons learned. Sorry it’s late (the goal was January).

High-level stat for 2025:

• Books read: 51

2025 breakdown by month:

• January: 4
• February: 4
• March: 4
• April: 4
• May: 4
• June: 5
• July: 4
• August: 5
• September: 4
• October: 4
• November: 5
• December: 4

If you’d like to know what those 51 books were, see my 2025 reading list here.

Here are a few things I learned along the way:

• Reading for general information is critical if I want to generate new ideas—and I do. A Technique for Producing Ideas reinforced this. I have to learn about ideas so I can borrow from them when I’m trying to come up with a new one myself.
• Rereading high-quality books is sometimes better than reading new books. I reread a few books last year, and that helped me a ton. I’m now trying to reread at least one book every month.
• Synoptical reading is key to leveraging books to solve hard problems or deeply understand something. See more here.
• Framework books are a good fit for my personality, and they’re helpful. They give you the framework or process to use when you’re trying to accomplish something. They don’t give you the answer, but they show you how to get to the right answer.
• I get the most out of books when I read with intention; that is, with a clearly defined purpose for reading that book. That purpose should be a problem I’m actively trying to solve or a topic I want to understand better. This year, I’ve started writing down the problem I need to solve or the topic I want to understand before I choose a book. That’s helped me do more synoptical reading and get more from my reading that I can quickly put to use.
• There are no hacks with reading. I have to not only read but also do the work to understand what I’m reading. The best way to do that (that I’ve found so far) is to synthesize a book and share what I learned with others. But I haven’t found a way to be consistent with that.
• Learning through reading doesn’t feel like a chore anymore. It’s something I enjoy doing in my downtime. The personal-growth aspect of it appeals to my curious nature, and I feel like I can sustain it for a long time.
• Application of knowledge is the key to getting better outcomes. A priority of mine in 2025 is to apply what I’ve learned from reading, specifically around decision-making with imperfect information and probabilistic thinking.

Those are my takeaways and reading stats for 2025!

Yesterday I finished my second AI workshop at Georgia Tech. This session was focused on learning how to use the AI agent and workflow tool n8n. The person leading the session has built a sophisticated e-commerce company that’s automated on the n8n platform, so he was very knowledgeable.

n8n reminds me of workflow and conditional logic tools I’ve used in the past, but it’s way more powerful. The ability to connect it to foundational models like those from OpenAI (ChatGPT’s parent company) is huge. Last night, we linked our n8n workflow to OpenAI models via API, connected our n8n workflow to Telegram so we can give it written instructions, and built an OpenClaw-type setup in n8n.

Working with these tools hands-on with other people who are motivated to learn them makes for a wonderful environment. I met several great people last night, and I’m looking forward to the next session.

Following up on my stock-based compensation (SBC) post from yesterday, I did some digging into a few companies based on what Kevin Koharki shared in his interview last week. As of today, I don’t think SBC is a bad thing; it just isn’t well understood. I view it as a tool, and the impact it has on a company’s shareholders (negative or positive) is determined by how management uses the tool.

We’re moving into an era when technology companies are shifting from asset light and cash rich to capex heavy and possibly strapped for cash. The cash-generation abilities of public tech companies will be scrutinized more closely going forward. After looking at the impact that SBC and related buybacks can have on the “true” free cash flow of a company, I suspect that evaluating SBC’s impact will become an important part of how companies are valued.

I’m working on my own framework, which I’ll use going forward. It will leverage what Koharki shared and also incorporate other variables that determine the per-share economic impact of SBC on shareholders. Hopefully I’ll have something I can get feedback on within the next few days.

Last week, I listened to an interview with Kevin Koharki. The topic was something I’ve been thinking about for over a year: how does stock-based compensation (SBC) impact shareholders of public companies? When I review the financial statements of public technology companies, I see that they have large amounts of SBC expense, but it’s a noncash expense. So, many people back it out and focus on cash flow from operations, free cash flow, or adjusted EBITDA. But that SBC must be paid to employees in cash at some point (assuming the stock performs well), so how is it accounted for?

I’ve leaned toward using diluted share count instead of shares outstanding when calculating free cash flow or potential free cash flow per share. But Kevin thoroughly explained how SBC materially reduces operating and free cash flow of companies that offset SBC dilution by repurchasing shares (i.e., doing buybacks). He does a great job of walking through a real-life example of a company and showing where on the financial statements you can find the information you need to determine how SBC affects cash flow per share. The biggest thing I learned from Kevin was that in some companies, shareholders get hit twice: when companies issue SBC and when they do buybacks. And that second hit isn’t accounted for on the income statement or cash flow from operations. I hadn’t considered this, but when he walked through it, it made a lot of sense.

Kevin is spot on, but I will say that two assumptions underpin the worst-case scenario in his argument. He assumes the stock price will be higher when employees cash in their SBC and the company repurchases shares. That’s been true the last few years, but historically it isn’t always true. The stock market has long periods of underperformance (e.g., 1964–1981). Companies can’t control the prices at which employees sell shares, but they have total control over the price they pay to buy back shares. The smartest CEOs repurchase shares only when the stock is suppressed because the stock is likely trading for less than it’s worth, meaning the returns on buybacks are often higher than capital allocation alternatives. Henry Singleton mastered this, and it’s a big part of why Warren Buffett praised him and why Teledyne’s shares outperformed (learn more here). If a company repurchases shares at materially lower prices than when SBC was issued and doesn’t issue additional SBC to employees to compensate for the lower stock price, it’s likely a benefit to the company. Those are two big ifs, though, especially the second one.

The second assumption is that companies that issue SBC are buying back shares to offset the dilution created by SBC. That’s true of many companies, but not all. Some companies don't repurchase shares. Instead, they focus on minimizing share dilution by limiting share count growth to a low single-digit percentage each year and improving the underlying fundamentals of the business. One company I track increases share count by 2% to 3% a year via SBC, but it’s growing top-line revenue, operating cash flow, and free cash flow at 30% or more annually. The company hasn’t repurchased any shares to date. Thus, the business fundamentals are increasing at a rate that far outpaces the share dilution from SBC. Said differently, the intrinsic value of the company is growing at over 30% annually, while shareholders are being diluted roughly 3% annually. It’s true that 3% dilution means investors own 3% less of the pie each year, but that’s not as much of an issue when the pie is 30% larger each year.

I think Kevin is on to something and that more people will start to pay closer attention to this in 2026. Anyone interested in how SBC works or how it impacts shareholders should consider watching Kevin’s interview here.

Current Project: Reading books about entrepreneurs and sharing what I learned from them

Mission: Create a library of wisdom from notable entrepreneurs that current entrepreneurs can leverage to increase their chances of success

Cumulative metrics (since 4/1/24):

• Total books read: 111
• Total blog posts published: 742

This week’s metrics:

• Books read: 1
• Blog posts published: 7

What I completed in the week ending 4/19/26 (link to the previous week’s commitments):

• Read Warren Buffett and the Art of Stock Arbitrage, a framework book that details the less-publicized side of Warren Buffett’s operation, which generated over 81% annualized returns from 1980 to 2003 through merger arbitrage, spin-offs, and other special situations

What I’ll do next week:

• Read a biography, autobiography, or framework book

Asks:

• No ask this week

Week three hundred sixteen was another week of learning. Looking forward to next week!

Continuing with my new protocol, here I’m going to share content I consumed and learned from.

What I consumed this week and what I learned from it:

• The true cost of stock-based compensation – Interview with Kevin Koharki, associate professor of accounting. Koharki provides a thorough explanation of the true economic cost of issuing stock options, RSUs, and PSUs to employees. He walks through an example that includes actual financial statements of a public company. His point is that the true cost of issuing shares to employees and buying back shares to offset share dilution is significant and isn’t reflected in the cash flow statement or income statement. Cash flows are significantly less than investors realize, especially now, when many companies are investing heavily in AI-related capital expenditures. He highlights how Nvidia recently announced they’re changing their disclosure around stock-based compensation.
• Google CEO on capital allocation  – YouTube interview with Sundar Pichai. Great perspective on how he thinks about allocating capital to investments that won’t pay off for many years. Great insights into why Google was caught flat-footed when ChatGPT launched, how he evaluates long-term bets, and how he thinks about leading one of the world’s largest companies.
• Marginal gain learning fallacy – YouTube presentation with Justin Sung explaining how to be more productive. To stay on track and productive, you have to make micro adjustments that are directionally accurate. To make the right micro adjustments, getting feedback on them is vital. You get marginal gains only when you measure what actually matters!
• How to blow $1.3 million in 1 week – Hilarious YouTube interview with Lil Yachty, where he shares what he did when his first check from his record label cleared. This video is lighthearted but has a message embedded in it. Lil Yachty is brutally honest about various topics, acknowledges how ridiculous his early spending was, and highlights the importance of having wise people around. Clear example of making irrational decisions because he didn’t know any better (i.e., he had a mindware gap as discussed in this book).

That’s what I consumed and learned from last week.

This week, I shared the bookshelf section of this website and my habit of reading a book a week with someone. They asked why I read so much when I could use AI to give me the gist of books I’m interested in. They argued that it’s more time-efficient to leverage AI because I can cover more material faster. That argument is valid, but replacing books with AI summaries would prevent me from getting some of the biggest benefits I receive from reading books.

Here are a few reasons why I think reading long-form material like books is worthwhile for me:

• Focus – Reading is like exercising my brain’s ability to focus. Reading for an hour or two every day requires me to focus for long periods of time. My ability to focus (which, in today’s world, I consider a valuable and increasingly rare skill) has been greatly enhanced.
• Self-education – Reading is the best form of self-education for me. I get to consume the wisdom and learnings of others at a pace that I choose. The ability to self-learn anything and apply it is a superpower and can lead to outsize success.
• Spotting patterns – When I’m immersed in a book, I see patterns between it and other books I’ve read. These patterns have led to insights that I otherwise would not have found. When I consume summaries of books, I don’t spot patterns as easily.
• Stories – A lot of what I read is biographies and historical recounts. The stories are what stick with me, not the facts or the outcomes.
• Relaxing – Reading books is my default activity when I want to relax and decompress.
• Stimulation – After I finish a reading session, I always feel mentally stimulated. I’m thinking about what I read and feeling like I grew a small amount. I enjoy mental stimulation and the feeling that I’m continually growing. I don’t get that same feeling from other leisure activities.

This isn’t a comprehensive list. I enjoy reading books for lots of other reasons. But it gives you an idea why technology won’t replace (although I’m OK with it enhancing) my reading books.

This week, I was talking to a service provider I’ve used for years. I had an issue and called to have it resolved. During the conversation, they asked about my experience and hinted that they wanted to know how they could get more of my business. I truthfully told them that their pricing prevented me from using them as much as I’d like. And that I was looking for a rate tailored to what I planned on doing and not just the standard pricing everyone gets. To my surprise, he quickly said, “Yeah. We can do that. What price were you thinking?” After some back and forth, he told me I can likely get 50% to 70% off the price I’m currently paying, but it has to be approved by someone more senior. So we submitted the request, and I should hear back in a few days. The entire exchange was simple and will likely result in a sizeable reduction in cost for me.

My big takeaway is that more things in life are negotiable than most people realize. I’ve been a customer for years and was never offered a discount until I explicitly asked for one. Unbeknownst to me, it’s a common thing they regularly do but don’t advertise. A discount is offered only if you ask.

This was a reminder that you never know what’s possible until you ask. The worst that could happen is they say no. The best that could happen is you get a great deal, special treatment, or unadvertised special offerings.

Wayne Gretzky said it best: “You miss 100% of the shots you don’t take.”

Last week, I shared that I wanted to start attending hands-on AI sessions to accelerate my learning and be around others trying to do the same. This week, I attended my first evening session at Georgia Tech. It was free and open to the public. This session was focused on using AI tools to create high-caliber images and videos.

My takeaway is that the session was exactly what I needed. It was hands-on, with everyone helping each other figure out how to use the tools and sharing what they created. I learned a ton and met some good people. I definitely want to do more of this.

I recently finished reading What Intelligence Tests Miss. It was the best book I’ve read on decision-making, and I’ve read several other books on this topic. The others were all good, but this is the first book that dove deep into the outsize impact that rationality has on decision-making and the differences between IQ and rationality. It explains in great detail why people with extremely high IQs sometimes make irrational (i.e., stupid) decisions. I also found its taxonomy of reasoning errors a helpful visual. It explains what causes bad decisions (cognitive bias) and how to catch them so you can identify and correct bad thinking during your decision-making process.

I want to make sure I retain and apply what I read in this book, so I’m challenging myself. I want to create a digest of this book and use it to write a post that synthesizes what I learned.

After I’ve read a book, I always get a lot out of creating a digest and using it to synthesize what I learned in a post, but it takes a ton of time and energy, which is why I haven’t done one in a few months. But this book has me excited, and I think it’s worth the time and effort.

My goal is to have both the digest and the synthesizing post done by the end of the month. Wish me luck!