By 2001, MSFT had 18 million shares of Apple, sold by 2003. Later a 2:1 and then a 7:1 stock split, would give them a value of $36 billion today (if my math and the article's math are correct), but was sold for a relatively small profit instead.
It's harder than you think to hold onto a massive amount of shares in a growing company.
There are lots more, here's a more systematic study from Fidelity:
"
The average investor lost money in the Fidelity Magellan fund under Peter Lynch’s tenure during a period of time when the fund returned around 29% annually."
It's easy to look back and say, wow, if I had invested at that time, I'd have $x m/b, but the temptation to "lock in gains" or "diversify" is really strong. And sometimes it is right!
> A systematic study, oh ok which study is that then - there is no link provided ? The link you provided is just one persons essay.
Well, that makes two more links than you've provided.
Sorry, can't find an original source link online (it was from before the interwebs, after all), but here's another with more quotes from Lynch, and google will find lots more:
Yahoo definitely was successful with the Alibaba investment, whether through luck or good decision making - though I agree, the rest of their decision-making lends weight to the "luck" evaluation.
No dispute at all that they showed no competitive advantage in managing their actual business.
And in comparison to actually growing a company that is worth a similar amount its childs play,