Yesterday’s blog entry reported on an e-mail that I sent to Academic Researcher Wade Pfau on August 12, 2011. He sent a response the same day.
Wade congratulated me for obtaining a monthly column at the Financial Highway site. He said that his university subscribed to a service that provided links to media sources using the university name and that my article was picked up by the service. “So everyone here got to see a link to your article in email and our alumni director made a link to it in the alumni group on Facebook.”
He also said that he had received positive comments from a journal on his Fisher and Statman research. He said that things were looking good re future publication. He said: “I might include about the rolling 30-year periods in it rather than keeping it for a separate article. I’ve been getting so busy and there is not enough time to write all the papers I want to write these days.”
My response, sent later the same day, appears below.
It always brings a measure of cheer to my day to receive an e-mail from you. Intelligent discussion of investing is like sunshine to me!
That’s a great story about your university and the e-mail links. The internet works in mysterious ways! It’s so new and different a communications medium that people have not figured it out yet.
One of my dreams is to get one of my calculators picked up at the LifeHacker site. It is a a HUGE site and the calculators are perfect for it because the site is looking to share knowledge of practical tools. So what happens a week or so ago? LifeHacker picks up one of my saving articles! It brought in lots of traffic and I am of course grateful. But it is strange for things to happen that way. My investing work is 20 times more important than my saving work and my saving work is 20 times more popular. I actually think of my investing work as Anti-Marketing. My saving articles pull people into my site and my investing articles drive them right back out again!
I like the idea of adding the rolling 30-material into the Fisher article. You have two A+ articles there. But you are better off with one A+++ article. The engineer for the Beatles said that his greatest career regret was that he let them release Strawberry Fields Forever/Penny Lane as a single rather than saving it for inclusion on Sgt. Peppers. Sgt. Peppers got plenty of attention on its own. But it would have been even bigger with inclusion of those two songs (and the dropping of two inferior songs). One A+++ article can have more impact than a lifetime of solid B+ material. So don’t make any mess-ups in that article! (That’s a joke.)
There’s a point made in one of the Bogleheads threads in which you participated that I think might be worthy of some of your consideration. It was one of the critics who put it forward but it was a strong point. He asked: “What is the THEORY that explains why P/E10 would be able to predict returns?” My strong sense is that people don’t spend enough time thinking that over. I believe that I understand the theory (it is of course possible that I am wrong). My sense is that my understanding of the theory has helped me avoid pitfalls that lots of others have fallen into.
Anyway, you must get that article on the front page of the New York Times before our economic and political system falls! That’s sort of a joke too, but perhaps only 50 percent so. We really do live in times that are both exceedingly scary and exceedingly promising (but perhaps all times seem that way to the poor humans living through them without knowledge of how things turn out on the last page of the story).
Please take care.