Set forth below is the text of a comment that I recently posted to the discussion thread for another blog entry at this site:
I had hoped that you would address the specific point I made about the difference between the historical (whole period) figures and the rolling figures (what would have been available to the investor).
But you simply went back to your comments about opening up discussion boards.
This demonstrates why letting you post on boards is a waste of time, you actually can’t (or are unwilling to) debate investing matters.
I had also hoped to go over why trying to get “everyone” to market time wouldn’t work and why VII in general would not work but if you can’t be bothered to discuss the simplest point that I made it would be a complete waste of time.
So, in an attempt to have an actual investment focused discussion …
Do you accept my point that the Pfau paper showed that market timing (as defined in the paper) did not improve investment results (8.61/8.59 versus 8.60)
If you don’t accept that, why not? (with references to actual numbers)
Thank for sharing youe thoughts, Evidence. I will post this comment as a blog entry here as well when space opens up. That should be in about two months.
I continue to believe that we need to open every site to honest posting re the peer-reviewed research, with a single exception, and that we need to do that by the close of business today, if not a good bit sooner. I stand by the comments that I made in my earlier response.
My hest wishes to you.
Rob
feed twitter twitter facebook