Set forth below is the text of a comment that I recently posted to the discussion thread for another blog entry at this site:
You confuse two things into thinking they are related. You say that Greaney’s study does not contain a valuation adjustment and then make the claim that this is an error. Those are two separate points. It is like the analogy of Tesla’s not having microwave ovens. Of course a Tesla does not have a microwave oven, yet that, by default, does not make an error anymore than your comments about Greaney’s study.
Do you believe that Robert Shiller’s Nobel-prize-winning research showing that valuations affect long-term returns is legitimate research?
Rob
Your claims fall flat when you look at your outcomes. This is why we have a scorecard. It separates the truth from B.S.
The peer-reviewed research shows the outcomes for all stock investors going back for as far back as we have good records. The peer-reviewed research shows that ignoring the effect of irrational exuberance always hurts and never helps.
The fact that you Goons are so emotional about making sure that investors don’t learn what the research says just highlights the point. If there was a case that could be made for ignoring irrational exuberance that could be made in a calm, civil way, you would do it. Shiller showed that stock investing is at times highly emotional and your behavior over the past 22 years shows that he was right.
The Greaney study truly does not contain a valuation adjustment. I am as sure of that as I am that the world is round and not flat. We’ll see how things play out in the days and years following the onset of the next Buy-and-Hold Crisis.
My best wishes.
Rob
Rob,
All these comments are just your opinions and interpretations. As said before, we can clearly see who is right by looking at outcomes. Everything has played out for you. You are in your 60’s. You either have a fully funded retirement account or you don’t.
Greaney’s retirement study either contains a valuation adjustment or it doesn’t.
I was too afraid of you Goons to point out the error from May 1999 until May 2002. Then I worked up the courage and I never looked back. I’ve paid a price for pointing out the error in the study. I don’t say different. But the fact that the published rules of all the sites that I have posted to and indeed the laws of the United States support me tells me that this Get Rich Quick/Buy-and-Hold thing cannot stand. I think we are going to see the power of Get Rich Quick/Buy-and-Hold diminished in the days and years following the onset of the next Buy-and-Hold Crisis. We’ll see.
I’m proud to be able to say that I have been standing on the side of the American people for 22 years running now, in any event. No apologies.
All best wishes.
Rob
Do you have a fully funded retirement or not. That is the scorecard for telling us who is right and who is wrong.
Does the Greaney retirement study contain a valuation adjustment or not? That is the scorecard for telling us whether Get Rich Quick/Buy-and-Hold is on the up and up or not.
If the Buy-and-Hold Goon Squads were not supporting a cover-up, there never would have been a single abusive post and I would be flying high today, with hundreds of millions of dollars in my account. If we all were thinking clearly, there would be zero penalty for pointing out an error in a retirement study.
Those were real people who posted at the Motley Fool board and who thought that the Greaney study was legitimate. I was there.
Rob
If my Tesla had a microwave oven, we would see the greatest economic boom in history.
It’s your opinion that valuation-based market timing is not required. It’s my opinion that it is.
If there were no abusive posting, both opinions would be represented in every discussion held on the internet. Your opinion is held by ten times the number of people who hold my opinion. So there would be more people giving voice to your opinion, in the short term. I believe that, so long as my opinion was represented in every discussion, over time we would see more people coming around to support my opinion. There’s only one way to find out for sure.
It is not your place to “win” the debate by imposing a ban on honest posting. You agreed to follow the published rules of the various sites and you should honor that promise. Each community member should be able to hear both opinions and to make up his or her mind as to how to invest his or her retirement money.
That’s where I’m coming from re this one, in any event.
I sincere believe that the Greaney retirement study lacks a valuation adjustment.
Rob