"If an "investor" buys based purely on todays fundamental metrics alone, should they really not buy a stock if it is represents what I believe are outstanding fundamentals because of what you terms are the "upcoming" cyclical changes?"
For a business that has a strong competitive position, and which can be expected to deploy it's capital wisely going forward, and can be expected to grow it's intrinsic value (ie not just get bigger) over time, and is not highly cyclical, I completely agree.
For a business that has the above attributes, but is also highly cyclical, a kind-of agree (ie, over the very long term it is likely to work out ok).
For a business that is highly cyclical and is in a mature sand highly competitive sector - it is downright dangerous.
For a business that is in structural decline - it is suicidal.
In short, each business has to be taken on it's own merits, and we each have to form our own opinions about where in that spectrum HVN sits. The degree to which we can ignore the future will be highly dependent on that business, the industry in which it finds itself and whatever other rational circumstances you can dream up and deem relevant.
(20min delay)
