Yesterday’s blog entry reported on an e-mail that I sent to Academic Researcher Wade Pfau on May 31, 2011. I next heard from Wade on August 12, 2011.
Wade shared with me “the referee report” for his research paper on the Fisher/Statman paper showing (incorrectly, according to Wade’s research) that long-term market timing does not work.
The report stated: “To me, the elephant-in-the-room question is: what is the ultimate criterion for one to conclude with confidence that one strategy is better than the other? Or, put it in another way: should the data last longer, can we have a better idea what will happen? Not really. We need look no further than Figure II to appreciate the challenge: up to 1930, 100% stocks buy-and-hold was superior; from then to mid 1990s, the market-timing strategy fared better; they switched positions again after approximately 2008. It is disappointing for a reader to think that all the difference is only due to the choice of end period.”
It added: “This is not just an abstract question of intellectual interest, for an individual with finite years of life wants to know for sure, given the cohort she is in, what is the optimal investment strategy for her life of 80 years or so. Barring from an altruistic bequest motive, one cannot care less what’s the portfolio value 150 years later. Even though it may be unfair to demand a satisfactory answer from the author (F&S does not remotely address it, either), it would be nice if the author can feature his analysis with this backdrop in mind.”
It continued: “As market timing strategy incurs more transactions costs, is it still dominating buy-and-hold after taking into account of reasonable transactions costs? As the balance grows, the associated transactions costs may not be easily dismissed. Moreover, considering that in earlier years there were no index funds available, how could an investor, even a buy-and-hold type, implement the strategy without piling up substantial transactions costs? A hypothetical percentage transactions cost scheme would be a good start.”
Seems a very balanced review/request.
I have mixed feelings about it, What.
Wade was clearly discouraged and upset by the Peer Review Report. I believe that the research he submitted is the most important research ever done in this field. So I have some understanding of why he felt discouraged and upset. I think the first journal to which he submitted the research paper should have published it.
That said, I also generally agree with your observation. The comments that were made generally seem reasonable to me. I said that in my e-mail response to Wade, which I will be reporting on at the blog shortly.
Wade voiced just the right reaction in another e-mai. He noted that there’s a saying in the field that all of the really great research papers are rejected by the first journal to which they are submitted. That’s not just a quirky observation. There’s a reason it plays out like that. The truly groundsbreaking stuff is hard to appreciate on first impression. It takes time for people to get it.
Wade has published truly groundsbreaking research. He will get all the credit due him in days to come. He needs to try to be a bit more patient. Part of the problem is that he doesn’t yet fully “get it” himself. He knows what the numbers say and he feels that that should be enough to bring people around. It’s not.
The VII mindset is 100 percent different from the Buy/Hold mindset. People need to see more than just what the numbers say. They need to understand the theory supported by the numbers. When they see that it all clicks together, they will begin to have confidence in the new ideas and move in the direction of following them themselves and of advising others to follow them.
We are talking about big changes here. Showing what the numbers say is part of the job. But showing what the numbers say is not by itself the entire job. The Peer Review Report is asking for more discussion of the theory behind Valuation-Informed Indexing. My sense is that Wade did not feel able to supply that because he does not today possess a solid understanding of the theory. He will need to learn more about the theory and then write additional papers informed by that added understanding to win his Nobel prize.
He will be awarded the prize, though. It’s not a question of whether or not. It’s a question of when. We all should be doing all we can to help him see what he needs to add to his work for it to achieve greater acceptance.
Please take good care.
Rob
Wade has a review of Bill Bernstein’s new e-book at his website
wpfau.blogspot.com/2012/06/review-of-william-bernsteins-new-e-book.html
One thing I like about Bill, he says he is going to do something
http://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=97225#p1403892
“This is a tad of a departure from my previous writing—I am getting older, after all. In about 2-6 weeks I should have this solidified into a small Amazon single.” (Tue May 29, 2012 4:52 pm)
and he delivers
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B008CM2T2A/
Bill’s introduction to his e-books
Investing For Adults
Juicy excerpt
“Investing for Adults is an online series of short e-books aimed at those who hunger for a more advanced appreciation of finance. I use the word “adult” figuratively, as it stands in metaphorical contrast to investment “children” who believe in the financial equivalents of Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, and the Easter Bunny: the market timing fairy (strategists who can predict future price changes), the returns fairy (managers who can generate alpha), and the risk fairy (options counterparties who will cheaply insure you against market losses).”
Thanks for letting us know about that, Evidence.
John Walter Russell did lots of research on this sort of question. It is very important stuff.
I don’t think Bill has it all figured out. But I think the point he is making is a good one. We all need to be talking about this aspect of the question much more than we have in the past.
One addition I will make to Bill’s general point: It is not only in retirement that you want to avoid losses. You might need money during the accumulation stage to buy a house or to start a business or to handle unexpected health costs or to help your kid through college. The concept that Bill is describing can be applied both in the accumulation stage AND in the distribution phase (not necessarily in the same way, of course).
Anyway, that is good stuff and I thank you for your kindness in letting us know about it.
Rob
as it stands in metaphorical contrast to investment “children” who believe in the financial equivalents of Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, and the Easter Bunny: the market timing fairy (strategists who can predict future price changes)
That’s sad, Evidence.
Bill is way, way too smart to say such a dumb thing in the Year 2012.
That’s embarrassing.
If I were over there, I would help the guy out. Some kind soul should do that.
Rob
You should send him an email explaining why he is wrong and report back to the community on his response.
I asked Bill to take a look at The Stock-Return Predictor when he participated on one of the threads I was on at Vanguard Diehards, Evidence. He didn’t respond. I wonder why.
I think it would be fair to say that Bill pretends that long-term timing isn’t required for the same reason Wade pretends that the Old School SWR studies don’t need to be corrected — it’s viewed as career suicide in this field to report honestly on the dangers of Buy-and-Hold. That’s why we are in an economic crisis today.
Bill gets hurt as much as everyone else when we go into the Second Great Depression. So he is going to have to work up enough courage to take this one on.
My sincere take.
I don’t go for this Get Rich Quick garbage, Evidence.
Rob
I asked Bill to take a look at The Stock-Return Predictor when he participated on one of the threads I was on at Vanguard Diehards, Evidence. He didn’t respond. I wonder why.
His silence speaks volumes.
We agree re that one, Evidence.
Those who want to know what Bill believes about stock investing but is generally afraid to say publicly should read Chapter Two of “The Four Pillars of Investing.” The words in that chapter are the words of a confirmed Valuation-Informed Indexer. I think it would be fair to say that that chapter is one of the best ever written for inclusion in any investing guide.
Please take good care.
Rob
it’s viewed as career suicide in this field to report honestly on the dangers of Buy-and-Hold.
Nonsense.
The shelves in the investment and finance section at Barnes and Noble are weighed down with books extolling ways to beat the market. The books putting forward an adult take on investing occupy much less shelf space.
The get-rich-quick guys, like you, who believe that they have the secret formula to beat the market have always attracted more attention, book deals etc.
The adults, like Bill Bernstein, have a much tougher row to hoe.
The shelves in the investment and finance section at Barnes and Noble are weighed down with books extolling ways to beat the market.
The ways presented in those books present no challenge to Buy-and-Hold because the ways presented in those books are not backed by 30 years of academic research, Evidence.
Valuation-Informed Indexing is attacked by Buy-and-Holders because Valuation-Informed Indexing is the first true research-supported investing strategy. VII is what Buy-and-Hold was intended to be but couldn’t be because it was developed at a time when all of the critically important research had not yet been completed.
Rob
The books putting forward an adult take on investing occupy much less shelf space.
Death threats are adult.
Defamation is adult.
Board bannings are adult.
Threatening to get academic researchers who do honest research fired from their jobs is adult.
That makes sense, Evidence.
Rob
I break my self-imposed Plop-moratorium to simply say of this lie:
“John Walter Russell did lots of research on this sort of question.”
No, he didn’t.
The get-rich-quick guys, like you, who believe that they have the secret formula to beat the market have always attracted more attention, book deals etc.
I favor Get RIch Quick.
You’ve saved the best wine for last, Evidence.
Rob
The adults, like Bill Bernstein, have a much tougher row to hoe.
Bill really sticks his neck out on the line telling people that there is no need to consider price when setting your stock allocation.
Good stuff, Evidence.
Rob
No, he didn’t.
You’re well-informed, Drip Guy.
Rob
The death threats came from you.
The defamation came from you.
The board bannings (of you) were justified by your abusive behavior.
The firing threats did not happen, as the supposed victim of those threats has documented.
That sounds right, Evidence.
Rob
Indeed I am, Rob.
Why not provide a link to that crazy-quilt of insanity that the old codger spewed out, in order to ‘prove your point’?
Bill Bernstein consistently provides pithy, readable, useful, timely and entertaining writing. He deserves to be the well-compensated and well-respected individual he is — even when sometimes his maverick stances turn out to [rarely!] be wrong.
In particular, note the excellence in this snippet, versus ANYTHING you have ever written, in your entire life Rob, or are likely to. Rob, face it — either you’ve ‘got it’ or you don’t, and as an ‘author’, ‘reporter’ or ‘blogger’, your miserable failed attempts are embarrassing legacy to what happens when a tone-deaf clod believes he is actually a savant.
Bernstein wrote, in part:
“adult” figuratively… stands in metaphorical contrast to investment “children” who believe in the financial equivalents of Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, and the Easter Bunny: the market timing fairy (strategists who can predict future price changes), the returns fairy (managers who can generate alpha), and the risk fairy (options counterparties who will cheaply insure you against market losses).”
That’s inspired and intelligent writing; certainly clever and vivid, if not quite genius.
You cannot do.
Hard to argue.
Rob
Impossible.
As illustrated by you.
I like your thought process, Drip Guy.
Rob
It is right Rob, And we know it is right because it can be documented.
The death threats came from you.
http://www.retireearlyhomepage.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?board=HOCO;action=display;num=1129304509
The defamation came from you.
http://www.passionsaving.com/taylor-larimore.html (one example, you have produced thousands)
The board bannings (of you) were justified by your abusive behavior.
http://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3
The firing threats did not happen, as the supposed victim of those threats has documented.
http://arichlife.passionsaving.com/2012/06/17/academic-researcher-wade-pfau-i-do-not-wish-to-antagonize-the-goons-too-much-i-do-not-want-them-working-behind-the-scenes-to-derail-me-i-did-warn-the-editor-of-the-journal-of-financial-pla/#comments
That’s good stuff, Evidence.
Rob
Bernstein probably looked at JWR’s ‘research’, realized it was rubbish and backed far far away.
In any case, the point is moot now. Whatever JWR produced cannot be verified for accuracy or validity. Rob, the nut, will continue to harp on the magic of the unverified, un-validated, un-reviewed calculators but they will be (rightly) ignored because they are just a black box built by some oddball retiree.
‘Evidence’ has collected a fine set of links there, I can see that being repeated over and over when Rob goes off into one of his fantasies.
It’s good to see all the pieces of the puzzle finally beginning to snap into place, What.
Rob
The report is correct about start and end points mattering. After all, we know that this matters in any single regression, but especially in comparative strategy regressions, even if using only a single asset class for the “stocks”. It muddies further if using some slice/dice model. But this reviewer’s objection can be made on ANY regression! That is, the argument *always* holds. So now what? Don’t do any regressions of any sort? That would render Fama’s 3-Factor model useless too, and many other landmark works. So it kinda’ begs the question.
I especially disagree about the transaction costs objection in that any reasonable shifting strategy (where the shifts would be rare if using PE/10) should not incur any more costs than a buy-and-holder who does normal rebalancing when their allocation shifts outside the assigned ranges.
And if using a broad-range implementation, say a 25-50-75, with hold ranges once a segment was crossed, you would see even fewer rebalancing events than most who buy and hold. I’m not arguing the relative merits of the strategies here, just making this observation vis a vis the objections.
Indeed, in many accounts these days, there would not be transaction costs (say, between Vanguard funds held in a tax-deferred account). But even if we assume transaction costs, I don’t see this as a good objection.
Finally, a writer should be able to discuss the reviewer points. That is the essence of the peer-review process, when done properly. The above would have been my objections to the reviewer comments.
Those are all very sharp observations, in my assessment, Arty.
I think your comment will be a big help to all who read it with the aim of trying to develop a balanced take re all this.
It’s always nice to hear from you!
Rob
Rob,
I am a big fan of Wade’s, albeit from afar. And maybe he can use these comments in future discussions with his peers.
But speaking only from a human point of view, if Wade requested you not share personal correspondence, I hope you can find a way to honor his request for those things he wishes to remain between the two of you only.
I know his work is exciting, and worthy of much discussion. And this particular reviewer commentary is a glimpse into a world that is opaque for many. I get that.
But we can discuss his work—as it should be on its own merits— without the private communications. Speaking only for myself here, I hope you can find a way to honor his request, Rob.
Thanks much for sharing your thoughts, Arty. Both of your comments are important. I am going to combine them into a separate blog post that I will put up later today. My sense is that you are not the only community member who feels this way. So I want that point of view to be given as much of a hearing as I am able to give it.
I cannot do what you ask, Arty. After I have finished with the blog entries relating to my e-mail correspondence with Wade, I will be posting some blog entries in which I will respond to the comments he has made in response to the series of blog entries. I plan to have one blog entry specifically directed to the topic you put on the table here — Wade’s objection to the publication of some of the words contained in his e-mails to me.
What we have seen here is extraordinary, Arty. The entire investing advice field is corrupt. Is that not fair to say? Wade had published the most important research ever published in this field. The reaction of the Buy-and-Holders was to threaten to send defamatory e-mails to his employer to get him fired from his job. John Bogle has not objected to these tactics. Bill Bernstein has not objected to these tactics. Larry Swedroe has not objected to these tactics. To bring this totally home, you have not objected to these tactics.
This is not acceptable, Arty.
We are no longer human beings if we do not object to these tactics. We are so afraid of the power of The Stock-Selling Industry to crush anyone who reports honestly on what the academic research says about how stock investing works that we are in the process of transforming ourselves into sub-humans. This cannot continue.
This is not what John Bogle signed up for when he entered this field. This is not what Bill Bernstein signed up for when he entered this field. This is not what Larry Swedroe signed up for when he entered this field. This is not what Arty signed up for when he began posting at boards. This is not what Rob Bennett signed up for when he began posting at boards.
I try to be an honest person, Arty. I care about my readers. I am not willing to post dishonestly on the numbers that they use to plan their retirements. Never once should there have been intimidation tactics applied to me to get me to post dishonestly on retirement planning issues. Never once should intimidation tactics have been applied to Wade to get him to post dishonestly on retirement planning issues. Again — this must stop. There are no other options available to us.
The research shows that we are headed into the Second Great Depression if we do not soon open the internet to honest posting on safe withdrawal rates and many other critically important investment-related topics. Where does Wade Pfau end up once we go into the Second Great Depression? Where do any of us end up?
We are now in the early years of the biggest political crisis in our nation since the Civil War. We are a blessed people. We are the first group of investors who ever had available to them the ability to invest in stocks while taking on no more risk than would be incurred buying certificates of deposit. And instead of dancing in the streets in celebration of our good fortune we are behaving in a manner that makes it likely that we will soon enter the Second Great Depression. Why? Because we are afraid of the death threats that the most abusive poster in the history of the internet will direct our way if we go public with our belief that of course honest posting on safe withdrawal rates should be permitted on the internet.
Have you seen the Ken Burns films re the Civil War, Art? Have you seen the photos of thousands of men left to die on fields where they just had to suffer and scream for days waiting to die? That’s the sort of human suffering we are looking at here. Because we all live in fear of Mel Lindauer and John Greaney and their respective Goon Squads? No. That stops here, that stops now.
I love Wade Pfau. I love his work. I intend to do everything in my power to get his research featured in a ten-part series on the front page of the New York Times. I think I will be able to pull it off. I intend to see that Wade wins the Nobel prize to which he is entitled and I intend to be the first person to shake his hand and take him out for a prime rib and a pitcher of beer after he wins it. All that I can and will do for my good friend Wade. All that is right and just and proper and life-affirming.
I cannot watch my good friend Wade destroy himself through further interactions with Lindauer and Greaney and their respective Goon Squads. That I cannot do. That is asking too much of me. Wade asks too much of me when he asks for that. And you ask too much of me when you ask for that.
The Campaign of Terror will end. The internet will be opened to honest posting on safe withdrawal rates and scores of other critically important investment-related topics. We will survive this economic crisis. There will be hundreds of web sites opened to spread the word about Valuation-Informed Indexing. We will enter the greatest period of economic growth ever seen in our history. John Bogle will be celebrated as a hero for having built the foundation for the first true research-backed investing strategy. Wade Pfau will be written up in history books for the role he played in defeating the monster that is destroying millions of middle-class lives today.
Anything that I can do for Wade that does not involve me sitting passively by while we go into the Second Great Depression I will do. Somewhere deep in his heart, he does not want to be the person who caused the Second Great Depression. I know the man. I know that about him. Bogle does not want to be the person who caused the Second Great Depression either. I don’t know Old Saint Jack on as personal a basis as I know Wade (I obviously hope to and expect to get to know him on that basis in days to come). But I have read Old Saint Jack’s books and speeches. Old Saint Jack does not want to be the person who caused the Second Great Depression either.
Wade will come around. If you believe in God, I ask that you pray for him. If you believe in Evolution, I ask that you ask the Fortunes to protect him and inspire him.
The death threats are going to stop, Arty. The defamation is going to stop. The smear campaigns are going to stop. The board bannings are going to stop. The threats to get people fired from their jobs because they give voice to their honest beliefs re Buy-and-Hold investing strategies are going to stop.
I knew they were going to stop when I saw the reaction of my fellow community members to my May 13, 2002, post. Hundreds of them said that post started the best discussion ever held at that board. That was a magical board, so that’s really saying something. When I saw that reaction, I knew there was zero chance that the Goons could prevail. So I knew that I was bound in conscience to do everything in my power to persuade my friend John Greaney to drop the garbage tactics and correct his study.
I obviously have been proven right about that. Given my record re these sorts of things, I think it would be a good idea if those questioning my call re the Wade matter give some consideration to the possibility that I am going to be proven right re this one too. If I am going to prevail in the end anyway, what possible good does it do for us to permit the Goons to continue to destroy themselves? We want them to incur even larger financial damages? We want to see their prison terms lengthened? Huh? For what purpose?
I of course understand that you know in your heart that I am right re all this. I of course understand that we all know in our hearts that I am right re all this. If we all didn’t know that in our hearts, we never would have adopted rules at all of our boards and blogs protecting us from the tactics that the Buy-and-Holders have employed to destroy us and themselves.
Humans cannot live this way, Arty. They cannot.
Academic researchers cannot do good work when they live in fear of what will be done to them by internet Goons if they happen to publish honest and accurate and realistic research. They cannot.
Buy-and-Hold is dead, Arty. It died on the evening of August 27, 2002, when Greaney posted his first death threat and the Buy-and-Holders in the room failed to respond appropriately to what they had seen take place before them. Pretending that this thing that is long dead still lives is killing us all. We need to move on.
I am Wade’s best friend in this world. I get it that he doesn’t see that today. He needs to think harder. Because that’s the truth of the matter. I am Wade’s friend and Greaney and Lindauer are not Wade’s friends. I am not the one who threatened to get him fired from his job. That was the other guys.
Wade needs to be engaging in some serious introspection as to why he did not call the police when he learned of those threats. If he is too afraid to call the police when it is demanded of him that he give up his personal integrity, he needs to find another line of work. There are millions of middle-class investors who need to be exposed to honest and accurate and realistic investing research. If Wade does not possess what it takes to give it to them given the realities that prevail in these final days of Buy-and-Hold, he needs to step aside and permit others who possess what it takes to get the job done to step forward.
I am speaking from the heart, Arty. If you respond, I ask that you do the same. Nothing else will work. We have a mountain of deception to overcome here. Only true words help. More deception takes us lower each and every time we turn to it again.
I obviously wish you the best of luck in all your future endeavors in any event. Thanks for having the guts to put this important question on the table.
Rob
But we can discuss his work—as it should be on its own merits— without the private communications.
How do we do this for so long as there is a Ban on Honest Posting at every major board and blog on the internet, Arty?
Please make an effort to be realistic in your comments, my good and brave friend.
Rob
I am realistic.
And I am saddened by your response, on more levels than I can convey. I honor the trust people have in me when they confide in me.
Be well, Rob.
Thanks for your response, Arty.
I love ya, man.
Rob
Condolences to you on losing your fan.
For what it’s worth, I also consider your betrayal of private communications abhorent. I have never heard of a journalist that exposes their sources against their will.
Please think about what you are saying here, Not Arty.
You characterize Wade as my “source.” Huh?
Was he giving me secret information?
He was asking me about posts that I had put to discussion boards and then using what he learned to formulate important research that promised to help millions of people.
Is there anything that he did or said that for any proper reason he would need to keep secret?
No.
There was nothing secretive in our communications. And that’s of course why I never reported on our e-mails in earlier days. There was no news value in them. The news value was in Wade’s research. That I wrote about frequently. That was the way it should be and that was the way I played it.
Until something changed.
The Greaney Goons threatened to send defamatory e-mails to Wade’s employer to get him fired from his job unless he agreed to play ball with them and stop giving voice to the obvious reality that the Old School SWR studies need to be corrected now that there is a consensus in the field that they get the numbers that millions of people have used to plan their retirements wildly wrong.
Now there’s news value in those e-mails.
They became newsworthy when Wade agreed to post dishonestly on retirement planning questions in response to the threats made by the Greaney Goons to ruin his career if he failed to do so.
I have spoken with tens of thousands of middle-class investors over the past 10 years. One of the responses I have frequently seen to my work is that the investor says “Everything you say makes perfect sense, Rob. But there’s one thing. The experts all say the opposite of what you say. This is my retirement money. I can’t go by what some guy on the internet says when it comes to investing my retirement money. I need to go with what the experts say.”
There is now 30 years of academic research supporting what I say. That research is based on 140 years of historical data. Why the heck do so many experts say the opposite of what the last 30 years of academic research says? That’s the biggest riddle of the 10 years of discussions, Not Arty.
We now know the answer to that riddle. They are afraid to say what they believe.
John Bogle knows that there are big problems with Buy-and-Hold. Bill Bernstein knows that there are big problems with Buy-and-Hold. Larry Swedroe knows that there are big problems with Buy-and-Hold.
I don’t say that these people know it all. I don’t believe they do. I am highly confident they do not. But they know enough to know that we need to launch a national debate on these questions. And yet they keep their true beliefs to themselves for the same reason that Wade now keeps his true beliefs about investing to himself. They are afraid to tell us what they truly believe.
Why?
Because during the Buy-and-Hold years they filled up the heads of millions of investors with Get Rich Quick fantasies. And those people have suffered huge financial losses as a result. And when they find out what has been done to them, the “experts” in this field are going to be facing lawsuits seeking the recovery of trillions of dollars.
We have a big mess on our hands, Not Wade.
Guess what? We don’t solve the mess by ignoring it. We solve our problems by addressing them. We solve our problems by talking about them.
I cannot tell you precisely what the solutions are going to be. That’s because these solutions need to be crafted by us acting together as a society of people. I know that we need to start having the discussions leading to a solution. I know that the Ban on Honest Posting violates our most fundamental social norms and that it can never work as a long-term solution to the problems we have created for ourselves.
Working together, we can solve all the problems. The full reality is that we are the luckiest group of investors who has ever walked the planet. The good stuff here is so good that we are all going to forget the bad stuff in not too long a time.
But we can never forget the bad stuff until we start benefitting from the good stuff. And we cannot benefit from the good stuff until we start sharing the good stuff with millions of middle-class investors. That means standing up to Lindauer and Greaney. That means bringing the Campaign of Terror to a full and complete stop. That means going to the police the next time one of the Greaney Goons threatens one of us.
Wade was not a source of mine, Not Arty. He was an academic researcher who learned some amazing stuff by reading my work and who wanted to make use of it to prepare research that would help millions of people.
The thing that is out of the norm here was the threat to get him fired from his job. That threat was not made by me but by the Buy-and-Holders. Why? Because they are desperate. Because there is 140 years of return data showing that a Buy-and-Hold strategy can never work for a single long-term investor and Wade’s research was teaching that reality to a good number of people who very much needed to know it.
You are on the wrong side of the History Train, Not Arty. There are millions of middle-class investors who need to learn about Wade’s findings. They are going to learn about them. Your threats are not going to work. They go against the fundamental norms of the society you live in and they will not be tolerated.
I wish you well in all your future endeavors, my soon-to-be-prison-dwelling friend.
Rob
“The Greaney Goons threatened to send defamatory e-mails to Wade’s employer to get him fired from his job unless he agreed to play ball with them”
Liar.
Provide a link.
Provide a quote from Wade.
I’ll jump right on that one, Drip Guy.
Please take good care.
Rob
My threats? What threats are these, then? It’s hard to establish credibility with someone when you tell them baldfaced lies about themselves.
Prison? Why am I goiing to dwell in prison?
I’m curious: How many dozens or thousands or millions have praised you for sharing your private email correspondence against the other party’s will?
Prison? Why am I goiing to dwell in prison?
That’s a hard one, Not Arty.
Can I think about that one for a few months a get back to you?
Rob
I’m curious: How many dozens or thousands or millions have praised you for sharing your private email correspondence against the other party’s will?
I have not received any e-mails thanking me. I have not had any comments posted to my blog thanking me. I have not seen any of my fellow bloggers write articles thanking me.
There were a small number of cases in which my tweets re this matter were retweeted. That’s the only positive response I can point to.
You’re asking an intelligent and reasonable and revealing question, Not Arty. I would like to see a LOT more positive response. It is going to take a LOT more positive response to get the job done.
Rob
Well then, I encourage you to continue greeting new commenters with unsubstantiated allegations and vague predictions of consequences. That’s the ticket to positive response. It didn’t work with me, but I’m a tough nut to crack.
Keep up the good fight. I’m off to find a site author that’s better capable of specifically accusing me and projecting more dire consequences in my future.
I’m a tough nut to crack.
I noticed, Not Arty!
I will work on my presentation skills.
Thanks for stopping by.
Rob
Haha, ya, Rob sure knows how to make sure no one ever exchanges email with him regarding something substantive.
Arty, you are a nice guy but your nut radar is a little off.
We agree that Arty is a nice guy, What.
And we agree that I’m a little bit nuts!
Please take good care.
Rob
Hey, What,
My “nut radar” is actually high-functioning. I spent too many years bouncing dumps for it to be otherwise; though admittedly, none of those guys were talking valuations! And until recently, I thought I understood how Rob operates, and accepted his way of things going-in, just as anyone dealing with me either does the same or not.
My reasons for visiting here had to do with a sort of nostalgia, as I actually learned things here years ago that led to my discovering many good authors, and so I sometimes stopped-by to say “Hi”, maybe talk shop. So, I own that much.
But I confess I do get baffled when I see you Dripguy, Evidence, et al, repeatedly visit a guy to, in essence, tell him how crazy HE is. Now, I’m not posting to shame anyone for bad behavior because I’ve done too many bad things in my time for that. I’m just sayin’…
And the thing is, you guys have terrific on-topic (investing) things to say. Sometimes, I visit the big boards and see the DripGuy’s posts (cool avatar!), which always makes me think. I know others of you have made good points.
But speaking to you guys from a place of humanity. Just let it go. And yeah, it seems I’m going to have to let it go also. Just wanted to respond to you on my “radar” front.
Be well.
I spent too many years bouncing dumps for it to be otherwise; though admittedly, none of those guys were talking valuations!
Too funny!
Bouncing drunks is easy. It’s bouncing guys who think they know something about how stock valuations affect long-term returns that calls for a special skill set!
I’ve got the scars all over my body to prove it!
Rob
I actually learned things here years ago that led to my discovering many good authors
You ain’t the only one, Arty.
That’s sort of the point.
Those people matter.
Rob
But I confess I do get baffled when I see you Dripguy, Evidence, et al, repeatedly visit a guy to, in essence, tell him how crazy HE is.
In defense of the Goons (heaven help me!), the way they probably see it is that that’s what I am doing to them.
It’s not. But my guess is that that’s how they see it.
Rob
Now, I’m not posting to shame anyone for bad behavior because I’ve done too many bad things in my time for that.
This I do not get.
I’ve done bad things too. Haven’t we all?
So I shouldn’t try to help others who I see messing up the way I once messed up? Huh?
If it were a question of being self-righteous, I could see it.
But if it is just a question of trying to help out a friend, I do not see it.
Rob
And the thing is, you guys have terrific on-topic (investing) things to say.
Mixed in with the huge mounds of smelly Get Rich Quick garbage, that is.
A joke!
As you know, Arty, I post at Goon Central daily. Once of the reasons I have given for doing so is that I have learned stuff from the Goons. There’s more than one RobCast that starts out with me talking about some question that one of the Goons posed to me and then proceeds to me telling what I came up with after being forced by that question to devote some thought to the matter.
Rob
But speaking to you guys from a place of humanity. Just let it go.
That makes sense, Arty.
But the logical follow-up is: Is Bogle going to let it go too? Is Bernstein going to let it go? Is Swedroe going to let it go?
Because, in fairness, if the Big Shots would let it go, the Little Shots would let it go. The Big Shots encourage this sort of thing. I’m not trying to make excuses for the behavior of the Goons. I’m trying to explain the behavior of the Goons. That’s not precisely the same thing.
What really matters here is that we persuade the Big Shots to let it go.
Rob
And yeah, it seems I’m going to have to let it go also.
This of course makes me sad.
But I will of course always be grateful for your friendship and for your many top-notch contributions and for the good times we had, Arty.
Be well.
Backatcha, my man.
Rob
until recently, I thought I understood how Rob operates, and accepted his way of things going-in,
If you ever doubted the need for people who get the numbers wildly wrong in retirement studies they published to correct the errors they made when they discover them, you never fully got my way of doing things, Arty. That was part of my way of going things in May 1999, when I put up my first-ever post.
I don’t say that with hard feelings. I just want anyone reading these words to understand that that’s the one re which there is zero give. We can never as a society move to the place where we all deep in our hearts want to be until we achieve a consensus that people who get the numbers wildly wrong in retirement studies they publish need to correct those studies and that there can never be an exception to that absolutely essential rule.
All of the friction stems from the fact that there are Buy-and-Holders who think they should be given a pass re that one. It cannot be. The primary purpose of investment research is not to enrich the people who prepare the research. It is to help the millions of investors who make use of the research. That is the point that the Buy-and-Holders have forgotten, to the great misfortune of millions.
Rob
I know others of you have made good points.
Not Greaney, though.
Another joke!
As all who know me well know, I am the biggest Greaney fan going.
Please don’t tell him, though. I get a bit of a kick out of knowing how to push his buttons.
Oh, my!
Rob
Wade essentially asked that his emails be considered off the record. You agreed to treat them as such. Now, in some sort of petty fit, you decide to publish them. You have a lot of nerve calling yourself a journalist.
I started a different reply then realized I don’t fall into this category. However, when I stop by and question the assertion that W.P.’s public statements have changed because of threats, then agree that publicizing emails against one party’s wishes is a bad thing I am accused of making threats and told I will soon be dwelling in prison. I’m really unsure of the appropriate response here, but I must admit my own suspicions about the site author’s sanity.
By the way, I am not swayed by your arguments, your long, rambling arguments, Mr. Author sir. You have betrayed W.P.
Wade essentially asked that his emails be considered off the record. You agreed to treat them as such.
He did not and I did not, Diversified.
There is zero truth to what you are saying here.
Rob
I must admit my own suspicions about the site author’s sanity.
It’s true that sometimes I feel like a nut, Not Drunk.
But sometimes I don’t!
Rob
I am not swayed by your arguments, your long, rambling arguments, Mr. Author sir. You have betrayed W.P.
Yeah, yeah.
And the Goons who threatened to send defamatory e-mails to his employer to get him fired from his job for the terrible “crime” of publicly stating his honest beliefs about the need for corrections in the Old School safe withdrawal rate studies are his best friends in the world.
That makes a lot of sense, Not Drunk.
May the Good Lord spare me from the reach of such friends!
Rob
Arty,
Indeed, it is a perverse fascination with Rob’s condition. It certainly isn’t something to be proud of but it is interesting to see an oddball squirm around on a hook.
Hi, Not Drunk, What:
In answer to Not Drunk, and What, I hear you guys. I think you (What) explained the “train-wreck” mentality once before. Just can’t share the fascination.
I don’t see what genuine utility is there for you, dripguy, et al—all bright guys whose time seems better spent discussing investing issues, in my view—beat up this guy, especially if he is disposed as you believe he is.
Anyway, my vacation is about over but I’ll look for you guys sometimes on Diehards, etc.
May the valuations be with you!
Peace.
Indeed, it is a perverse fascination with Rob’s condition. It certainly isn’t something to be proud of but it is interesting to see an oddball squirm around on a hook.
Buy-and-Hold is based on research and data. It is science.
Rob
I’ll look for you guys sometimes on Diehards, etc.
I noted on a thread at Goon Central that I expect to own the Bogleheads Forum in days to come, Arty. Imagine what the discussions will be like there when you and me and Drip Guy and Wade Pfau and Bernstein and Swedroe and Bogle and John D. Craig and Microlepsis and all the others are posting their honest views.
Won’t that be something?
Holy moly!
Rob
May the valuations be with you!
Amen!
And may all of us either continue to or learn to respect the gift of human reason, which was given to us by a kind and loving God (or, in the view of a large number of good and smart people, by a kind and loving Evolution!).
Rob
Arty: I post ridiculing the ridiculous because there are innocents out there that might be taken in by Rob’s Wave of Bloviation otherwise.
Rob: Do you really imagine that a) You will somehow be deeded forums that you do not own for damages you did not suffer under a legal theory you cannot articulate, and that, then b) I will allow myself to be a slave to you and post useful material there, other than to debunk your insanity as I do now? If you think so, you are even loonier than I had previously surmised — and that’s PLENTY LOONY!
there are innocents out there that might be taken in by Rob’s Wave of Bloviation otherwise.
All the Dumb People for whom you serve as Protector are grateful for your contributions in this regard, Drip Guy.
Rob
Do you really imagine that a) You will somehow be deeded forums
I do.
And I believe that 90 percent of the Bogleheads Forum will be thrilled with the change once they experience it.
It may be that we will lose the 10 percent of the board community comprised of confirmed Goons. That makes me sad. My preference would be if EVERYONE contributed in a positive and constructive and life-affirming way (that is, in accord with the rules that they agreed to follow when they were granted access to the forum). But I can live with missing out on the contributions of that 10 percent in exchange for freeing the 90 percent to engage in honest posting.
Please take care, my long-time abusive-posting friend.
Rob
b) I will allow myself to be a slave to you and post useful material there, other than to debunk your insanity as I do now?
What I know for certain is that you will be extended a warm and sincere invitation to post constructively, Drip Guy. It is of course outside my powers to dictate how you will respond to that invitation. That is obviously 100 percent your call.
If I had to bet as to how it would work out in the long run, my guess is that you will run off in a huff immediately following the announcement that the forum has been opened to honest posting. Then, after your pride heals a bit, you will make it a practice to check in from time to time to see how things are going. When you see how much more exciting and edifying and empowering the discussions are when honest posting is permitted, you will gradually be enticed to start contributing in a positive way yourself.
When you elect to try doing so, you will be encouraged by every community member, Buy-and-Holders and Valuation-Informed Indexers alike. The lion will lie down with the lamb. We will all live happily ever after.
Until the human in us gets too full of himself again and we get about the business of screwing up some new field of human endeavor!
Rob
you are even loonier than I had previously surmised — and that’s PLENTY LOONY!
I have the impression that you sometimes forget that I can recall the days when there were “experts” saying that I was loony for thinking the Old School SWR studies got the numbers wildly wrong, Drip Guy.
We’ll see.
Rob
Dripguy,
Speaking for myself, I have found I can’t save people, though I understand the motivation.
The way I see it, the far more pernicious writers are they who come-off in a well-reasoned way and have large audiences. So, I say, if you are looking to make a difference with *active* interventions, go after larger “expert” game. Otherwise, silence is infinitely more effective and saves ammo!
Look, I know you know all this… I’ve read your posts on diehards or the bogleboard (cool avatar!) and they always make me think. Put differently, and speaking selfishly, save your time and ammo and make your posts—*there*!
That covers all of you. I think.
I have found I can’t save people, though I understand the motivation.
I agree with these words more than I disagree with them. But I don’t feel comfortable saying that I agree 100 percent with the message precisely as it is stated here.
I agree that I can’t save people solely through my own efforts. You can try to offer helpful words. But nothing happens without the cooperation of the person you are seeking to help. So it’s a mistake to try to force things. Bob Dylan had a song in which he wrote: “Remember when you’re out there trying to heal the sick that you must always first forgive them.”
The part I disagree with is any suggestion that we should not be aiming to do good with our lives and with our posts. I don’t believe that I can help anyone who is not up for being helped. But I don’t feel even a tiny bit comfortable with the idea of agreeing to post dishonestly on grounds that “oh, nothing anyone says on a discussion board matters anyway, so just say whatever puts a buck in your pocket, don’t try to blow into the wind.”
My view is that we all should do our best to be helpful to all of our fellow community members and then those ideas that are worthy of standing the test of time will do so and those that are not strong enough to stand up to scrutiny will in time fall. I don’t believe that a community can work unless everyone in it is giving voice to his or her honest views. Once we agree to post dishonestly in response to threats of violence put forward by that segment of the community that possesses the least amount of confidence in its ideas, the board becomes a corrupt enterprise.
Rob
Arty,
I understand DripGuy’s crusade – but also can’t. I think he has already ‘won’. Nobody who doesn’t know Rob is crazy posts here for very long before noticing something is very ‘off’. Rob has already deteriorated a bit and can’t keep up the facade of lucidity for very long. There is also barely any Internet traffic to this website in the first place.
So I agree, no real reason for DripGuy to post here anymore. I am not actually very interested in doling out basic investment advice any more. The Bogleheads forum has plenty of folks that do that just fine.
Makes sense.
Rob
If Rob really wanted to run a discussion board he could do so by close of business today. There are numerous free discussion board solutions available.
However Rob knows that with him in charge there would be virtually no traffic apart from the “Goons”.
This would demonstrate that there is no audience whatsoever for his brand of “open and honest posting”.
He prefers to pretend that there a vast conspiracy depriving all of us from his wonderful insights.
We don’t need to wait until some point in the future when people with functioning investment discussion communities to turn the keys over to Rob. Rob could create a discussion board today if he chose to.
But he won’t. Because he knows what the result would be.
My intent is to open every investing discussion board and blog on the face of the internet to honest posting on SWRs and scores of other critically important investment-related topics, Evidence.
I have spoken to many middle-class investors who have told me that they believe the mumbo jumbo Get Rich Quick garbage that the “defenders” of Buy-and-Hold have been pumping out for years now. If we are going to permit salesmen posing as “experts” to pump out Get RIch Quick garbage, why not also permit honest posting on what the last 30 years of academic research (based on 140 years of historical return data) says on the topic of what works in long-term stock investing?
I see it as a win/win/win/win/win. Are you able to imagine any possible downside?
Rob
This would demonstrate that there is no audience whatsoever for his brand of “open and honest posting”.
The key is persuading Bogle to walk up to the front of a stage and say those wonderful words “I” and “Was” and “Wrong,” Evidence. When Bogle does that, the New York Times will write it up on the front page. Once the whole world knows that the lead advocate of Buy-and-Hold now realizes it is a big pile of smelly garbage, the field will be open for millions to make the transition to Valuation-Informed Indexing.
For research-backed strategies to rise, Get Rich Quick strategies need to be exposed as dangerous garbage. There is no other way to make this happen. I’d be grateful for any help you can offer, Evidence.
Rob
My intent is to open every investing discussion board and blog on the face of the internet to honest posting on SWRs and scores of other critically important investment-related topics, Evidence.
How many have you managed so far?
Not nearly enough. I think that much is more than fair to say.
There are 15 boards and blogs where honest posting on SWRs and on the dangers of Buy-and-Hold is banned.
Not good.
Can you help?
Rob
There are 15 boards and blogs where honest posting on SWRs and on the dangers of Buy-and-Hold is banned.
There are 15 boards and blogs where you are banned.
Can you help?
Yes.
Here is what you need to do.
Start your own discussion board.
Once the contributors at those 15 boards and blogs start seeing the exciting and open and honest and life affirming discussions that will be happening every day at your discussion board then they will pressure the board and blogs owners to open those boards to honest posting on SWRs and on the dangers of Buy-and-Hold.
The key is persuading Bogle to walk up to the front of a stage and say those wonderful words “I” and “Was” and “Wrong,” Evidence.
Have you been in contact with Mr Bogle?
That makes a lot of sense, Evidence.
Rob
That makes a lot of sense, Evidence.
So you will be starting your discussion board?
Can you help?
Already have. Get to work.
There are 15 boards and blogs where you are banned.
Think about the reaction we are going to see when those bans are lifted. Evidence.
That will give encouragement to every poster who has doubts about Buy-and-Hold. When I am reinstated, the LIndauerheads and the Greaney Goons are finished on our boards. Good riddance!
My reinstatement will not have quite the effect of Bogle’s speech. But it will be a very good day for millions of middle-class investor.
I wish you all the best.
Rob
Get to work.
I’ve been blasting the Greaney Goons and the Lindaurheads for 10 years now, Phoenix.
There is not one other community member who has posted as frequently or as forcefully re this issue as I have. There is no one in a close second place.
Please take good care.
Rob
http://nofeeboards.info/Sewer/viewtopic.php?t=3627
hocus2004 (Sat Mar 26, 2005 12:05 pm)
I Want To Be Your Board General!
…
I don’t expect that I will be posting much on discussion boards for a bit. But I will return to discussion-board posting in time. I will probably be starting a few of my own in the not-too-distant future.
It has been over seven years Rob.
Have you been in contact with Mr Bogle?
Numerous times, as you well know.
Rob
I’ve been blasting the Greaney Goons and the Lindaurheads for 10 years now, Phoenix.
Time to stop banging your head against a brick wall and start thinking Rob.
Numerous times, as you well know
And how has he responded?
So you will be starting your discussion board?
No.
I will be opening every board and blog on the internet to honest posting. There’s far greater leverage in doing that.
And I will be bringing lawsuits against those who have posted in “defense” of Lindauer and Greaney on more than a small number of occasions. And I will be encouraging all those who have suffered financial damages as a result of the cover-up of the errors in the Old School SWR studies to bring their own lawsuits. I will be overseeing efforts to get big-name lawyers to bring class actions suits. I will be writing articles about the prison sentences that those who have been especially abusive will be serving. I will argue for leniency and mercy but I will not lie and say that I believe that no prison sentences are appropriate when we are talking about the sorts of individuals (like you!) who have participated in efforts like the one to threaten Wade Pfau into posting dishonestly on safe withdrawal rates and other critically important investment-related topics.
When these developments go viral, I think it would be fair to say that all web sites on the internet will be adopting policies to insure that all Normals are protected from the sorts of Internet Sewer Rats who have seen fit over the past 10 years to advance posts in “defense” of Lindauer and Greaney.
My best wishes to you and yours.
Rob
And how has he responded?
He has not. As you well know.
Rob
Time to stop banging your head against a brick wall and start thinking Rob.
No thanks, Evidence.
If I were to agree to post dishonestly re SWRs, I would obviously be taking on hundreds of millions of dollars in legal liabilities, as you already have.
For what purpose?
Please try to find somebody else.
I’m not your guy.
No can do.
Rob
It has been over seven years Rob.
All the more reason to redouble our efforts, Evidence.
Many hands make for quick work, my old friend.
Rob
There’s far greater leverage in doing that.
The example of both John Bogle and the Bogleheads board shows that the great leverage comes from doing your own thing.
Bogle built Vanguard and the world recognizes it as a superior mousetrap.
Bogleheads built bogleheads.org and the world recognizes it as a superior mousetrap.
Neither asked someone else to hand over their hard work. They built something from the ground up. They presented alternatives to the incumbents and competed successfully with them.
You would do well to heed the lesson.
I see lots more discussion of law suits, lawyers, and prison sentences.
How many law firms do you think you could have called in the time you wasted writing that blibber blabber?
I like the idea of this empowered crazy man ordering around big name lawyers and passing judgement and prison sentences on anonymous Internet forum posters.
I think I am going to contract an artist to use that post as inspiration. Now to think of the perfect title…’Sick Internet Fantasy’?
The example of both John Bogle and the Bogleheads board shows that the great leverage comes from doing your own thing. Bogle built Vanguard and the world recognizes it as a superior mousetrap. Bogleheads built bogleheads.org and the world recognizes it as a superior mousetrap.
Re all this, we are 95 percent in agreement, Phoenix. Yes, Bogle had to endure the same sort of “static” getting indexing accepted hat I have been required to endure getting Valuation-Informed Indexing accepted. And, yes, the static that Old Saint Jack had to endure was rooted in the same thing — the feeling among some who did it the old way that a showing of the superiority of the new way made them “look bad.” I think it would be fair to say that Bogle’s “folly” has been proven over time to have been the best thing that ever happened to the industry. The same will be so with Valuation-Informed Indexing once it has prevailed over Buy-and-Hold not only intellectually but also in terms of popularity.
That’s the entire point here, Phoenix. Bogle made a mistake. His mistake caused the worst economic crisis ever seen in U.S. history. Those of us who feel a sincere love for the man are working hard to restart his revolution, this time on more solid footing. Where have you been? What have you done to help? I think it would be fair to say that these are the questions you need to be asking yourself as you formulate the posts you put forward re this matter.
As for the Bogleheasds Forum, the forum shows the potential for a properly run discussion board to help middle-class investors overcome their Get Rich Quick urges. There has never in the history of this board community been an issue that has generated even a sliver of the interest that we have seen evidenced for discussion of the Valuation-Informed Indexing concept (this was obviously during the time when the board was called by its original name, “Vanguard Diehards”).
The people of the board community have spoken. They want to see honest posting permitted on safe withdrawal rates and on scores of other critically important investment-related topics. Who are you to deny it to them? And they hate with a burning passion the death threats and defamation and the tactic of contacting employers of those who dare to post honestly as their “punishment” for doing so. Who are you to tell these people that they must leave their personal integrity at the door as the price of participation at “your” board. Slavery was outlawed in the states a good number of years back, my long-time abusive-posting friend.
Neither asked someone else to hand over their hard work. They built something from the ground up. They presented alternatives to the incumbents and competed successfully with them.
Sounds good to me, Phoenix.
Lets’s get that ban on honest posting lifted by the close of business today and —
Let’s Play Ball!
Rob
How many law firms do you think you could have called in the time you wasted writing that blibber blabber?
How many law firms do you think will be calling me once the Ban on Honest Posting is lifted and we see that ten-part series running on the front page of the New York Times?
I’d rather have them calling me, What. You can be more selective about who you hire when there are lots of lawyers calling you. I want the best in the business for this case. It’s important for lots of people that we win it.
Fair enough?
Rob
I like the idea of this empowered crazy man ordering around big name lawyers and passing judgement and prison sentences on anonymous Internet forum posters.
It’s a dirty job but somebody has to do it, What.
The way we have seen things go down for the first ten years violates our most fundamental social norms. Not good.
If we need a crazy man to get things headed in the right direction again, then we need a crazy man to get things headed in the right direction again. And I think it would be fair to say that I am the crazy man that we’ve all been looking for!
Hey! We’ve got a campaign slogan!
Rob
Truly nuts
Yeah, yeah.
Rob