I’ve posted Entry #692 to my weekly Valuation-Informed Indexing column at the Value Walk site. It’s called The Same Forces That Explain Bull Markets Explain the Suppression of Discussion of Shiller’s Research Findings.
Juicy Excerpt: Buy-and-Hold is nothing new. The term is relatively new. But the idea has been around for as far back as there has been a stock market to invest in. The core idea is to practice price indifference. That’s a dangerous idea.


Shiller is talked about all over the internet. Just Google it. What you don’t like is that people got tired of you lying about Shiller (and other people/things) as well as your poor behavior issues. YOU are banned. Shiller is not.
We disagree.
Shiller was awarded a Nobel prize for his research. So his research must have showed us something about stock investing that we did not know before Shiller published it. What is that something? I have been asking that question of Buy-and-Holders for 22 years and never once have I received a response. Buy-and-Holders don;t respond because they understand that it will be the beginning of the end for Buy-and-Hold if they do.
Shiller discredited Buy-and-Hold. Technically, he discredited the Efficient Market Theory. But it’s the same thing because the Efficient Market Theory is the only justification that the Buy-and-Holders ever offered for their loony-tunes “idea” that there might be an alternative universe 50 billions light years away in which everything works the opposite of how it had always worked on good old Planet Earth and valuation-based market timing (price discipline!) is not 100 percent required for every stock investor.
It’s no accident that the peer-reviewed research that I co-authored with Wade Pfau showed that Valuation-Informed Indexing has been soundly beating Buy-and-Hold for as far back as we have good records of stock prices. How else could it have possibly turned out? Could the exercise of price discipline ever produce poor results? I mean, come on.
Mention of Shiller’s name is not banned. But discussion of the far-reaching how-to implications of his amazing research is. The people who developed the Buy-and-Hold strategy didn’t’t have Shiller’s research available to them because it had not yet been published at the time. So they made a mistake. The best thing to do when you make a mistake is to correct it IMMEDIATELY. It’s been 43 years. We need to open every site to honest posting re the peer-reviewed research.
That’s where I’m coming from re this one, in any event.
My best wishes to you and yours, Anonymous.
Rob
You are proving my point. There is no suppression of Shiller, which was the point you were trying to make in your headline. Instead, the real suppression is of you. That suppression was needed because of your horrible behavior. You hijack threads, you won’t answer questions. You ignore what other people post, you block posts, etc. These are discussion boards meant to have a discussion and you are unable to participate in a normal discussion. You just want your opinion to be heard and believed.
Rob,
How many posts do you think you have made about Shiller on various boards over the last 20 years? Just a rough estimate would be fine.
okay, Anonymous.
I do wish you all the best that this life has to offer a person, in any event.
Rob
How many posts do you think you have made about Shiller on various boards over the last 20 years? Just a rough estimate would be fine.
The number is in the tens of thousands.
Rob
“ The number is in the tens of thousands.”
Thanks for finally admitting that your message is out there. Not only that, any normal person would tell you that have a couple hundred times, it has gotten excessive. When it gets into the thousands, it is beyond irritating. It means people have seen it and answered it so many times, they are sick of it. Further, if you haven’t got any material traction after 10’s of thousands of posts, additional posts are not going to have any impact, regardless of how you spin the story.
Your problem is that you can’t drop the story because you have used it as a cover for not working. Same goes with the silly Greaney schtick you keep perpetuating. You will keep repeating it and no one will agree with you. You will just remain broke and alone. Good luck with that plan.
It should have taken all of one post pointing out the error in the Greaney retirement study (it lacks a valuation adjustment) to get it corrected. It hasn’t been corrected to this day. That’s the problem. It’s not my pointing out the error that is a problem. It’s Greaney’s failure to correct the study that is a problem.
There were people at the Motley Fool board who used that study for helping in planning their retirement. I know this. I was there.
My best wishes.
Rob
And you have been told 10’s of thousands of times that there no error as the study did not require that. It is a retrospective study.
It is surprising that any board owner would let you post the same thing hundreds of times. Thousands of times is abusive. 10’s of thousands is a whole new level of horrible behavior and there was obviously no choice but to finally ban you since you refuse to have a normal discussion.
Greaney said that the study revealed the safe withdrawal rate. To determine what is safe, you need to look at the factors determining safety. Greaney ignoed the most important factor — the valuation level that applies on the day the retirement begins.
All that can be determined from a retrospective study that ignores the key factor affecting safety is the SURVIVING withdrawal rate. That’s what Greaney’s study reveals.
He should have corrected his study within 24 hours of becoming aware of the error he made in it. Had he done that, we would as a nation of people today be 22 years further along in our development of the Valuation-Informed Indexing concept and we would all be living fuller and freer and richer and better lives today as a result.
I recommended that we open every site on the internet to honest posting from the first day. Once we got the Greaney study corrected, it was my intention to take the discussion to every site on the internet and determine what it is within us that makes us want to deceive ourselves as to how stock investing works. Why has we for ao long permitted our Get Rich Quick/Buy-and-Hold impulse to cause us so much financial harm.
Reading in the Get Rich Quick/Buy-and-Hold impulse that resides within each and every one of us is the future of investment analysis.
Or so Rob Bennett sincerely believes, you know?
My best wishes.
Rob
It has all been answered 10’s of thousands of times. We are clearly not buying what you say and it is obvious that you use this and the same old lines on Shiller to try and distract from YOUR FAILED RETIREMENT/FAILED MARRIAGE.
Fix your own problems. We have done more than enough tolerating your silliness.
You Goons say that you don’t buy it. But it is not your place to deny access to accurate and honest and research-based reports re what the last 43 years of peer-research teaches us all about how stock investing works in the real world from millions of investors. Under the laws of the Unites States, they should get to hear both sides of the story and decide for themselves whether they want to take the research into consideration or go with a pure Get Rich Quick/Buy-and-Hold strategy.
My sincere take.
Rob
You have been given more than enough access. Normal people will address and issue/question a few times. It is obviously excessive when it is repeated hundreds of times. In fact, it is rude and disrespectful when people have to keep giving you the same answer hundreds of times. In your case, you admit to doing this tens of thousands of times. You are basically sticking up a middle finger in the face of those that have taken significant time over 2 decades to respond to you. Your lack of common respect and bad behavior went on for WAY too long and should have been cut off long before.
You know that, but you keep these stories going because it is the only cover you have for your failed retirement and failed marriage.
Had Greaney corrected the error in his retirement study within 24 hours of the moment it was brought to his attention, we all would have moved on to better things on May 14, 2002, and we all would be living better lives today. I recommended that he correct the error all along. I think that’s the answer, Anonymous.
I know it is!
Rob