Set forth below is the text of a comment that I recently posted to the discussion thread for one of my columns at the Value Walk site:
Seriously, Rob. It is like saying you look forward to joining Lebron James in winning an NBA championship. Your life is just an internet fantasy.
You’re entitled to your opinion, Sammy. But I would by lying to you if I told you that I share it.
I have had many big names tell me how important my work has been to them. Wade told me that he learned many things from me that he never learning getting his Ph.D. in Economics at Princeton. Somebody doesn’t just say that for no reason. Rob Arnott told me that my site was top notch. He is a giant in my eyes. Again, there would be no reason for him to say something like that unless he meant it. John Walter Russell though that my ideas were so important that he devoted eight years of his life to doing research to showing that the historical data supports everything I say. How many people have ever given up eight years of their life to research your ideas, Sammy? John was the most respected numbers guy in the history of the Retire Early community and he thought that his stuff was gold (and he came to that conclusion only after doing lots of skeptical research that won him over).
There are lots of others. Carl Richards LOVED my stuff. He banned me from his site because his readers were complaining that my stuff was so different from what they had been told by the Buy-and-Holders and yet so well-argued and so well-researched that it was upsetting them. But he told me that personally he thought that my web site was the #1 investing site on the internet. How often does that happen, that someone gets a fan letter from a site owner who has banned him? There’s something odd going on when something like that happens.
Lots of bloggers have told me similar things. Mike Piper is the biggest Buy-and-Hold fan that there could be. But he thinks that my stuff is of HUGE value. He banned me too. But he hated, hated, hated doing it. He came close to agreeing to let me post one article a month at his site. He wanted his readers to know about my work because he thought it was so important. But he was losing readers by letting me post at his site because my stuff was just too threatening to Buy-and-Holders, which comprise his entire readership.
Bill Schultheis is another one. When he discovered my site, he was raving about it. He too is a big Buy-and-Hold guy. But in a way that makes him a natural for Valuation-Informed Indexing. He learned at the Bogleheads Forum that i am “controversial” and then he got quiet. But on an intellectual level the guy just loved learning new stuff and, until it was made clear to him that there would be a price to be paid for expressing his sincere views, he couldn’t help but say how grateful he was to learn some new realities.
I could go on an on and on, you know? You already know most of what I am saying. You were there too for most of it. And of course you also testify to the importance of my work with every harassment post that you advance. You wouldn’t do that if you didn’t see Valuation-Informed Indexing as a threat to your beliefs about how stock investing works. What makes you see it as such a big threat? It’s the fact that it is the first true research-based strategy, the first strategy that incorporates both the pre-1981 research (as Buy-and-Hold does) AND the post-1981 research (that the Buy-and-Holders have elected to ignore so that they don’t need to acknowledge the possibility that they are humans and thus capable of making a mistake).
This is a big deal, Sammy. There are millions of middle-class people who need to provide for their retirements somehow. They need access to accurate and honest reports of what the peer-reviewed research in this field really says about how stock investing works. I provide it to them. The peer-reviewed research paper that I co-authored with Wade shows that by the simple act of becoming open to changing their stock allocations in response to big valuation shifts, investors can reduce the risk of stock investing by nearly 70 percent. If I had showed investors how to reduce investing risk by 10 percent, I would be on the cover of Time magazine. The problem with showing them how to reduce risk by 70 percent is that it makes the Buy-and-Holders look bad. That’s the only “problem” with what I have done, I showed the way to too big an advance in our understanding of the realities. What a bad, bad boy, you know?
I wish you all good things, Sammy. But come on.
Rob
You are a legend in your own mind.
How’s that working out for you?
It’s not working out perfectly, Anonymous. I think it would be more than fair to say that much.
But it’s working out about 500 times better than how it would be working out if I agreed to post dishonestly re the numbers that my friends are using to plan their retirements.
We all have to be able to live with ourselves. We all have to be able to sleep at night. I couldn’t live with myself if I took actions that would likely cause my friends to suffer failed retirements because I was afraid of what some internet Goon would do to me if I posted honestly re the peer-reviewed research in this field. I couldn’t sleep at night if I knew that I would be going to prison following the next price crash. I enjoy my freedom. The idea of going to prison holds zero appeal to me.
We all have to play the cards that we have been dealt to the best of our ability. That’s what I have been doing for 15 years now. That’s what I intend to continue to do.
Perhaps our legal system is a “legend in its own mind.” Perhaps it is Jack Bogle who is the “legend in his own mind” not for the smelly Buy-and-Hold garbage that he pushes so relentlessly but for the powerful insight that he taught me re looking to the peer-reviewed research for guidance on how to invest for the long term. Perhaps it’s the thousands of our fellow community members who put their necks on the line by daring to “cross” you Goons by expressing a desire to be able to post honestly who are the “legends in their own minds.”
I love my country. I know that much for sure. That one runs deep. So I am going to continue to go with that one.
I care about you Goons too. But there are limits, you know? Prison sentences are over the line. Re that smelly garbage, I would be truly grateful if you would try to find someone else.
I naturally wish you all the best that this life has to offer a person, Goon friend.
Rob
Your wife can’t sleep at night. She’s worried about how to pay the bills. Your kids can’t sleep at night. They’re worried about how they can possibly go to college. But none of that matters, as long as you get to sleep like a baby. I guess they just drew bad cards.
It depends on how you look at it, Anonymous.
The entire country drew bad cards if the next price crash puts us in the Second Great Depression.
But we also drew amazing cards in that this is the last economic crisis that we will need to live though. We now have 36 years of peer-reviewed research showing us how to avoid economic crises and how to retire many years earlier than we ever possible before. I’ll take it, you know?
We’re in a little bit of a jam. I don’t say different. But we are also living in a time of amazing growth opportunities. I certainly intend to take advantage of as many of them that fall into my lap as I possibly can.
I hope that works for you, good friend.
Rob
Uh oh. It looks like ESI is targeting you again. He says you financial journalist don’t know what you are talking about.
https://esimoney.com/proof-financial-journalists-not-money-experts/
I certainly agree that lots of people in this field call themselves “experts” when they are anything but. That includes the Wall Street Con Men. I think it would be fair to say that in many cases their primary expertise is in marketing.
I don’t agree that we should be looking at the financial statements of “experts” to determine whether they really are experts or not. That puts all the focus on the short term. Get Rich Quick strategies produce good-looking financial statement for a short period of time and then leave those following the “expert” advice in tears.
I look for stuff that works in the long term. I rely on the peer-reviewed research to help me sort out the gold from the garbage. I learned that one from my good friend Jack Bogle, would refer to as a a true expert on everything except the valuations matter, re which he let his ego get in the way of his desire to possess true expertise.
Even the biggest expert in the world isn’t perfect. We need to keep in mind the reality that all “experts” are humans and capable of making very big errors indeed. When something sounds too good to be true, there’s a good chance that it is not true. Bernie Madoff sounded good to lots of smart people for a time. Buy-and-Hold sounded good to lots of smart people for a time. Every Get Rich Quick scheme ever concocted sounded good to lots of smart people for a time. The good stuff is the stuff that passes the test of time and to identify that stuff you need to be willing to look at the peer-reviewed research.
And I really, really, really don’t think of people like Mel Lindauer and John Greaney who feel a need to advance death threats to “defend” their expertise as “experts.” Give me a freakin’ break. People who put forward death threats are con men, plain and simple.
Oops! I worry that I may have said something “controversial” again!
My sincere take.
Rob
You’re awfully flippant about your family’s financial pain. Pain for which you are the sole cause. It will be a miracle if any of them are speaking to you ten years from now.
A $500 million settlement provides a lot of financial security, Anonymous.
I love this country and that’s how this country deals with matters like this. I see it as my job to stay on the right side of the law and to let things play out as they will and to be sure to say “thank you” when I am handed the $500 million.
I will do that! I will get bygones be bygones and all of us who are not in prison cells will walk off together to a much brighter future.
I am sure!
Rob