“Shiller Obviously Showed Us Something We Did Not Know Before. Otherwise, He Would Not Have Been Awarded a Nobel Prize. What Is That Something? “

Set forth below is the text of a comment that I recently posted to the discussion thread for another blog entry at this site:

The 2023 Bogleheads conference is coming up.  Will you be attending?  This would give you the chance to ask questions directly to Wade Pfau and William Bernstein.  You can ask them about Greaney, Jack Bogle, Shiller, etc.  This is your big chance to be on the big stage and let the world know about YOUR research.  This is your shot to become the leading expert.  You want to save the world, right?

If we open every site on the internet to honest posting, then we are obviously going to open the Bogleheads conference to honest questioning. I urge that every day. Every investor on the planet should want to see that. Every particiant in that conference, and everyone listening to those making presentations, should want that. We all do better work when we all learn together.

It shouldn’t take 21 years to determine whether a retirement study contains a valuation adjustment or not. The fact that the Greaney study has not been corrected in the 21 years since I pointed out the error in it should concern us all. It points to something very concerning. And of course the other side of the story is that the development that caused the “controversy” (Shiller’s research) points to something very liberating — a critical advance in our understanding of how stock investing works (the market is not efficient, market timing/price discipline is always 100 percent required for every investor).

Shiller obviously showed us something we did not know before. Otherwise, he would not have been awarded a Nobel prize. What is that something? The Buy-and-Holders cannot bear to talk about it. Because the thing that he showed (that valuations affect long-term returns) is a huge advance. My take is that we should celebrate that liberating advance, not fret about the fact that learning something important and new means that there was a time when we did not know it all.

I believe that we will get to where we need to be. Probably not at this year’s conference. But in time. Given that we are going to get there sooner or later (presuming that Shiller’s Nobel-prize-winning research is legitimate research), I think we should just go ahead and celebrate the advance starting at the close of business today. But I am just one person, some guy who figured out how to post stuff to the internet. As you know. So, like you, I will just have to wait to see how things play out.

I hope that works for you.

Rob