Set forth below is the text of a comment that I recently posted to another blog entry at this site:
Let’s play Jeopardy.
Answer: the peer-reviewed research of the past 33 years needs to be discussed in every THREAD in which Buy-and-Hold “ideas” are advanced.
Question: Why has Rob Bennett been banned from every major finance board?
That’s a super comment, X. You cut through a lot of b.s. and got straight to the heart of things with that comment. Good for you.
I understand the point you are making.
And I stand by what I said.
The findings of the last 33 years of peer-reviewed research need to be discussed in EVERY FREAKIN’ THREAD in which they are relevant. That is indeed the Rob Bennett position.
And, yes, I think it would be fair to say that that is a big part of the explanation of why I am banned at every major finance board. What you are saying is true enough in that it explains the reality. But I am right on the ethical matter.
You Goons are correct in a hyper-techncal sense when you say that Shiller’s ideas are discussed at the Bogleheads Forum. There are people there who believe in Shiller’s ideas. And they post. And the posts stay up. And people read them. All of that is so.
But the comments they make are superficial. When the comments go deep (as they must if people are to be persuaded of the merit of Valuation-Informed Indexing strategies), the Buy-and-Holders step in and send out signals that these posters have “gone too far.” If the poster pulls it back, he remains to post another day. If the poster ignores the warning, he is removed. That’s the way it works.
The Valuation-Informed Indexers have been placed in a ghetto. It’s a ghetto in which they do not possess the same rights as Buy-and-Holders. It’s a ghetto in which they keep their most powerful insights to themselves. It’s a ghetto in which they do not say “Buy-and-Hold is dangerous” or “that claim is wrong” or “Bogle is contradicting himself.” It is a ghetto in which they watch their step and are careful not to offend their betters.
Not this boy, X.
Not ever. Not by a long shot.
Do Buy-and-Holders feel free to post in every freakin’ thread?
Has that ever been in question? Has there ever been any controversy about it?
Then why are there questions and controversies about whether Valuation-Informed Indexers should be permitted to do the same?
You have hit the mark with this comment. The question you raise here is the question that has been on the table for 12 years now.
I post honestly or I post not. If I see someone asking for a link to a retirement calculator and then I see some Buy-and-Holder link to FIRECalc, I am going to respond with a link to The Retirement Risk Evaluator. I’ll do it every time. I will never offer any apology whatsoever. If asked, I will explain that the reason why I post honestly re these matters is that I do not want to see my friends suffer failed retirements. I will add that I look forward to the day when we ALL post honestly and when Buy-and-Hold has been buried 30 feet in the ground, where it can do no further harm to humans and other living things.
No apologies whatsoever. None.
The Buy-and-Holders have the same right. The Buy-and-Holders believe what they believe and they have every right to share what they believe with others.
So what do we do?
Both sides have to respect the other side.
That’s how this ends.
The reason why it upsets people when I post about Valuation-Informed Indexing insights on every thread on which they are relevant is that many investors HAVE NO IDEA that there is 33 years of peer-reviewed research showing that Buy-and-Hold cannot work. I know this to be so because I had no idea of this myself prior to May 13, 2002. People don’t even know that there is a controversy. So it upsets them to find out that there are DOUBTS about this Buy-and-Hold stuff that they are using to finance their retirements.
The Buy-and-Holders are playing a very, very, very dangerous game. They are tricking people. They are leading people to believe that there is a consensus that Buy-and-Hold works when in reality there is now 33 years of peer-reviewed research very much cutting the other way.
EVERY INVESTOR ON THE PLANET NEEDS TO KNOW THAT THERE ARE TWO ACADEMIC SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT AS TO HOW STOCK INVESTING WORKS, NOT ONE.
When that is out in the open, we won’t see the ugliness that has characterized the first 12 years of our discussions. At that point, Valuation-Informed Indexers will be commenting on every thread at every board and no one will blink an eye about it. Everyone will understand that that’s just what we all should expect given the 33 years of peer-reviewed research supporting the new model.
And that’s when we will start to see the popularity of Valuation-Informed Indexing grow by leaps and bounds. People are not going to risk their retirement money on a strategy until they have heard it explored from many angles and in great depth. It is when as a society we acknowledge that those promoting research-based strategies have EVERY RIGHT IN THE WORLD to post at every thread on every board and blog on the internet that VII will take off on its way to becoming the dominant model for understanding how stock investing works.
Bogle has to give an “I Was Wrong” speech. Or, at the very least, he needs to give an “I’m Not Sure” speech. That will get written up on the front page of the New York Times. And then the ugly side of this comes to an end. From that point forward, it’s good stuff piled on top of good stuff piled on top of good stuff. For every last one of us. We are all on the same side in the final analysis, to be sure.
Every freakin’ thread, X.
That’s what I ask.
And that’s what I will get.
The length of your prison term will be determined by how long it takes me to pull it off. I vote for the close of business today, the timing choice that produces the shortest possible prison sentence for you and your Goon pals.
Don’t let the bad guys get you down, man.