Inflation protection by tangible asssets - wrong

For years the traditional wisdom - long on tradition, short on wisdom - held that inflation protection was best provided by businesses laden with natural resources, plants and machinery, or other tangible assets. It doesn't work that way. Asset-heavy businesses generally earn low rates of return - rates that often barely provide enough capital to fund the inflationary needs of the existing business, with nothing left over for real growth, for distribution to owners, or for acquisition of new businesses.

- Warren Buffett

What this implies is any asset heavy business (caution for the investors who follow the book value logic) carry higher risk to deliver returns to the shareholders than any business which is asset light but have intangible assets. An asset heavy business could be laden with assets like natural resources or plant & machinery or any other tangible assets. But over a longer period, the re-investment needs of these business would leave nothing for the shareholder and thus inflation adjusted returns from these business would not be worth to speak.

But business which own intangible assets of lasting value (e.g. Colgate brand has lasted more than century) coupled with minor tangible assets are hurt the least because of inflation. These business should have enduring franchisees which and the managements should have the focus to defend their moat and fortify it on a ongoing basis. Otherwise they would be a blip in the radar.