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

Other than a few critics, everyone avoids and / or ignores you, yet you don’t want to accept the realities of why this is the case. Instead, you try and cope with a fake story line.

I don’t want to be ignored and I don’t want any of the others (about 10 percent of the population) who believe that the last 38 years of peer-reviewed research in the investment advice field is legitimate research to be ignored. I think that we have something important to add to the discussion that benefits Valuation-Informed Indexers and Buy-and-Holders alike. I view powerful learning experiences as one of the few true free lunches available in this world and I love free lunches! And I care about all of the investors who are hurt when the laws of the United States are violated in an effort to keep people in ignorance re the far-reaching implications of Shiller’s research findings.

I am a Valuation-Informed Indexer, not a Buy-and-Holder. I want to see Valuation-Informed Indexing grow in influence at a much more rapid pace. That won’t happen until Valuation-Informed Indexers adopt a policy of calling Buy-and-Holders out when they engage in criminal or abusive acts to suppress discussion of the new research. If I am going to ask others to speak out, I need to speak out myself.

There’s nothing fake about the story line. The very fact that we have laws against this stuff shows that as a society we view it as bad stuff. I think we are right to do so!

There’s no valuation adjustment in Greaney’s retirement study! There’s no valuation adjustment in Greaney’s retirement study! There’s no valuation adjustment in Greaney’s retirement study! My sincere take.

Many people will react differently to a showing that there’s no valuation adjustment in Greaney’s retirement study in the days following the next price crash than they do today. That’s just human nature. You Goons show that you see that by the fact that you post here. If you were not worried about going to prison, you would just go on with your lives. You’ve said that you’re going to do that on several occasions, but you never stick to it. I wonder why.

Anyway, I see no valuation adjustment in Greaney’s study. And I think that people who are considering making use of the study to plan their retirement need to know that and to reflect on what it means for the likelihood that their retirement plan will be successful. I view a failed retirement as a serious life setback. Shiller is not a Buy-and-Holder. He wouldn’t have been awarded a Nobel prize if he were saying the same things that lots of others have been saying for over 50 years now.

There have been many people who did NOT avoid me or ignore me. There have been thousands of people who have expressed a desire that I be permitted to post at every discussion board and blog on the internet and to not be subjected to intimidation tactics when I do so There have been hundreds who have responded to my stuff with helpful comments and observations and questions that have helped me and many others to learn important things. And there have been a few who have worked with my to develop the Valuation-Informed Indexing concept in -ways that I believe will change the world in important and life-affirming ways. I view the peer-reviewed research that I co-authored with Wade Pfau as the most important research published in this field in 30 years. I added more value to this world with the 16 months that I spent working with Wade on that research than I did with any other project that I have worked on in my lifetime. I am exceedingly proud of it. And Wade never would have sent me an e-mail asking me to work on that research with him had I not worked up the courage to stand up to Greaney seven years earlier. Doing the right thing in the face of relentless abuse can have a big payoff somewhere down the line.

I’m a learner and a teacher, Anonymous. That’s the deal. Maybe God made me a learner and a teacher (that’s what I think), maybe it was Evolution, maybe it was just the Fates. Whatever it was, that’s the way the cards came down. There are no other learning and teaching opportunities with 1/500th of the potential of this one available today in this world. So I think that I am just going to continue riding this wave and seeing where it takes me. It has taken me to some awful places in the past 17 years. I’ll give you that one. It has also taken me to some amazing, wonderful places, places that I couldn’t have dreamed up in the days before I advanced that famous post from the morning of May 13, 2002. My assessment is that the good stuff that we have seen is going to end up having 500 times the influence of all of your nasty, abusive garbage. Just a funny hunch I have experienced from time to time, you know?

We’ll see. Learn! Teach! Grow! Read the Research! All of It!

My best wishes to you, Anonymous.

Avoided and Ignored Rob

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

Unbelievable. This is it? You have been lying about death threats all this time. You should be ashamed of your behavior.

I am not ashamed of my behavior from May 13, 2002, forward, Anonymous. I am proud of it.

It would be fair to say that I am somewhat ashamed of my behavior prior to May 13, 2002.

Not entirely so. Given what we have seen from May 13, 2002, forward, most reasonable people would conclude that my behavior prior to May 13, 2002, was completely understandable. Perhaps. But I am not so sure. I would like to expect better of myself.

I knew in May 1999, when I put my first post to the Motley Fool board, that the retirement study posted at John Greaney’s web site lacked an adjustment for the valuation level that applied on the day the retirement began. I lacked the courage to say so. That’s not good. All of the extenuating circumstances that applied and that influenced me were real. But still….

I would like to see us ALL expect better of ourselves. That’s what this thing is all about. The idea is to bring us all to a higher level and thereby to help us all live better lives in the future.

We’ll see.

Rob

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

“If I post a link to Shiller’s book, will that one count? ”

Just like your website, it doesn’t provide a direct link to any death threats or job threats.

It’s not hard, Rob. If the threats exist, then you just provide the links. When you don’t, people know you are lying.

When millions of people see 50 percent of their retirement savings disappear into thin air for no good reason, I have a funny feeling that they are going to know that SOMEONE is lying about how this stock investing stuff works. I have a further funny feeling that they are going to be able to figure out that it isn’t me.

But we’ll have to wait a bit to find out for sure, you know?

I wish you the best of luck with it, in any event.

Born Liar (Or Not?) Rob

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

“But he never actually says those words.”

And there you have it. Shiller says what HE is thinking, not what Rob Bennett wants him to say. You do this with almost everything. You twist around what people say, or don’t say, in order to make it seem like everything aligns to what you want. You somehow feel as if everyone needs to say what you want and that people need to let you say whatever you want on their forum. Write your own book and say what you want to say, but leave everyone else alone.

We live in communities, Anonymous. When one member of the investment advice community (Shiller) says something important (that valuations affect long-term timing), other members of the community (like me) incur an obligation to take that something into consideration when advancing their own contributions to the community discussions. If valuations affect long-term timing, there is precisely zero chance that the safe withdrawal rate is the same number at all times; it is a number that is higher when valuations are low and lower when valuations are high. So I said that. Good for me. I did what all community members are supposed to do.

You didn’t like that. Because you want people to maintain confidence in Greaney’s study. I don’t want that. I want people to have confidence in Greaney’s study if it is accurate. But if Greaney got the numbers wildly wrong, I want people to lose confidence in Greaney’s study. I like Greaney as a friend and I am perfectly happy to help him out when I am able. But I like all of my fellow community members. I am not willing to risk seeing thousands of my fellow community members suffer failed retirements just because one insanely abusive community member is embarrassed to have people learn that he got the numbers wildly wrong in a retirement study posted at his web site. No freakin’ way, no freakin’ how.

I don’t feel that everyone should say what I want. I believe that everyone should feel 100 percent safe saying precisely what they believe. I am 100 percent opposed to the use of intimidation tactics to coerce community members into saying things that they do not believe to create a phony impression of consensus when no consensus truly exists. The majority of our fellow community members are Buy-and-Holders. I want them saying why they think Buy-and-Hold is a good approach. But a significant minority (perhaps 10 percent) has serious doubts about Buy-and-Hold. I want those people expressing those doubts and not being threatened into silence by you Goons.

Why should I “leave everyone else alone,” as you suggest? If I see that Greaney’s study is in error, I have a responsibility to point that error out to community members who might believe that the study is legitimate if I fail to speak up. I want to help people, not destroy their lives. I am going to continue pointing out errors in studies when I see them. I am going to continue objecting to acts of financial fraud and to death threats and to all the rest that you Goons bring to the table.

The United States is a community of people too. As a community of people, we have made it a crime to advance threats of physical violence and to engage in extortion and financial fraud. I think that those are good and necessary laws. So I am not going to join you Goons in pretending that Greaney included a valuation adjustment in his study. Thousands of our fellow community members have looked at the Greaney study over the past 17 years and not one has been able to locate a valuation adjustment in it. That tells me that I am on the right track in thinking that there is not one there.

I will indeed say what I have to say in my book. But I will then try to share what I write in my book with every investor on the planet, including those who congregate at all of the boards from which I have been improperly banned at the demand of you Goons. I offer no apologies whatsoever. I like those board communities and I want to see them serving the purposes for which they were formed. It is not possible for them to do that for so long as this massive act of financial fraud continues.

My sincere take.

And my best and warmest wishes to you and yours.

Saying-What-He-Believes (Not Just in His Book But Everywhere!) Rob

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

Wasted 17 years of your life is the correct assessment.

Okay, Yip.

I don’t think so.

I think that I have accomplished more good for the world in the past 17 years than I could have reasonably expected to have accomplished in 50 full lifetimes. Getting the numbers right in retirement studies is a very, very, very big deal. And if big mistakes are made in retirement studies that are not corrected for a significant length of time, that causes not only economic problems but also political problems — people lose confidence in the political system under which they live when that system cannot find some means to provide access to honest and accurate retirement planning numbers.

And I believe that it is by providing value to the world that one earns money for one’s self and one’s family — it is providing value that is the driver behind wealth accumulation. I think it is the fact that I have provided so much value that has made this 17-year journey so contentious. You Goon can’t stand to think of me being so successful. So you double down and triple down and quadruple down on your abusiveness. And a lot of the people who are in positions of authority and who should be helping to expose your criminal behavior and bring it to a complete stop are worried too that getting the numbers right in retirement studies is a big deal and that their reputation as experts will be jeopardized when it becomes common knowledge that the numbers that they have been providing for years are miles off the mark, according to the last 38 years of peer-reviewed research.

We have got ourselves into a big mess. But we are blessed to be living at a time when the 38 years of peer-reviewed research needed to make sense of this investing stuff is available to us and to have had thousands of fine and brave and intelligent people already express a desire that every site on the internet be opened to honest posting. And to live in a country that is just too good to permit the horrible stuff that we have seen continue much longer after we all see the human suffering that will result from a price crash of 50 percent or more that remains in place for some time. I think we are very close to a breakthrough that will go down in history as the biggest advance in the history of personal finance and I am humbled to have played a lead role in bringing it about.

Please let me know if there is ever anything that I can do to make your life go a little easier. I naturally wish you all the best that this life has to offer a person.

Hang in there, man.

Confident (Reasonably!) Rob

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 think way too much of yourself.

You’ve said that in a direct way hundreds of times, Anonymous. If we count indirect ways, you’ve said in thousands of times. So the thought behind the statement is obviously of great import to you.

I am extremely proud of the work that I have done over the past 17 years. If that’s what you are accusing me of, then you are right on. I think that Bogle is a giant. He built the foundation for the Valuation-Informed Indexing Model, which I see as the future of investment analysis. So I of course think very, very highly of Bogle. But I of course believe that he got the valuations question wrong. Which means that he got every calculation wrong. If valuations have to be considered in every calculation, every calculation that Bogle performed got the wrong answer because he never considered the effect of valuations.

Shiller is the one who corrected Bogle’s work by showing that valuations must be considered in every calculation. So I also think a great deal of Shiller. I also view Shiller as a giant. But Shiller’s work has not had nearly the influence that it should have had for the past 38 years because Shiller and all those who believe that his work is important have shied away from saying to the Buy-and-Holders: “hey, you got the numbers wrong.” So Shiller doesn’t tell the entire story right either.

I say those words. I take all of the stuff that Bogle got right and incorporate it into my analysis. Then I add the stuff that Shiller got right so that the stuff that Bogle did actually helps people instead of destroying their lives. And then I add the part that Shiller failed to put into the mix, the exploration of the far-reaching how-to implications of Shiller’s “revolutionary” (his word) research findings. Without that critical part, the entire thing just does not work. People who don’t know Bogle don’t know how stock investing works. And people who don’t know Shiller don’t know how stock investing works. And people who don’t know Bennett don’t know how stock investing works. The way it is.

You are right that I think very, very highly of the work that I have done. But when you say that I think “too much” of myself, there is a clear suggestion that my high appraisal of my work is not justified by the realities. My high appraisal of my work is 100 percent justified. If I had not been right in my famous post of the morning of May 13, 2002, John Walter Russell would not have devoted eight years of his life to doing research on my ideas. If I had not been right in my famous post, Wade Pfau would not have devoted 16 months of his life to co-authoring research with me that shows beyond any doubt whatsoever that, in his words, “Yes, Virginia, Valuation-Informed Indexing works!” If I had not been right in my famous post, you Goons would not have put yourselves at risk of spending the remaining years of your lives in prison cells due to your desperate concern that, if the published rules of every internet site were followed, millions of investors would learn about the Valuation-Informed Indexing concept and buy into it.

You are the one who has an unjustifiably exalted view of yourself. Your view is that you can never admit even the possibility of once having made a mistake and that, if the laws of the United States don’t permit you to threaten academic researchers who show that you did indeed make a mistake, then those laws have to be ignored. You are the one on the wrong side of the law and that reality shows us that you are the one with the unjustifiably exalted view of himself.

I follow the law. I follow the peer-reviewed research. I follow the published rules of every site. I am the humble one here.

The work that I have done is of great value. I offer zero apologies for the work that I have done. But when I praise the work product, I am offering tribute to the country that put in place the laws that protect people like me from people like you. I am praising this country that I love as much as I am praising Rob Bennett the person. And I am praising Bogle when I praise my work because my work gives new life to Bogle’s work. And I am praising Shiller when I praise my work because my work gives new life to Shiller’s work.

Full truth be told, I am praising Greaney when I praise my work. Greaney’s intent when he posted his retirement study was to help people, not to destroy their lives. So, if Greaney had been thinking clearly, he would have thanked me for pointing out the error in his study and thereby permitting him to correct it before it caused him further embarrassment.

I have done amazing work. But I did not do it alone. I couldn’t have done it without the help of millions of people who formed the laws of this country and who built the Buy-and-Hold Model and who worked up the courage to stand up to you Goons when you threatened those of us trying to help out our fellow community members. It is the lawbreakers among us who suffer from an exalted view of themselves. I am just doing the job that we all sign up for when we sign up at a discussion board — using my intelligence and experience and love to help out my fellow community members.

I am playing it straight. You are playing it crooked. That’s a big distinction. It is because I am playing it straight that I have been able to achieve more and more great advances as the sand has continued to pass through the hourglass. I offered Greaney the opportunity to do the same. I asked him to work with John Walter Russell and me to develop the first valid safe-withdrawal-rate study. He took a pass. Greaney would be one of the ones today with all of the amazing accomplishments had he taken me up on that offer.

I think that what was going on there is that he just didn’t love himself enough to position himself to realize all those achievements. I like to think that I DO love myself enough to do good in the world. I am humble enough to respect the laws of the country in which I operate. That’s an appropriate and healthy humility. But I am proud enough to want to get the numbers right in retirement studies that I put before others for their consideration. That’s an appropriate and healthy pride.

Hating yourself is not the answer. Greaney hates himself. Not this boy, you know? I often point out that I can get things wrong, just as Greaney did. But I show deference to the law and I invite other community members to point out any mistakes that I have made so that I can fix them quickly. That’s a healthy humility that does not evidence itself in self-loathing. Greaney’s self-loathing helps no one, it brings us all down.

I love my work, I love my accomplishments. I hate your goonishness because it destroys you and millions of others. It is my view that the laws against financial fraud are good and necessary laws. I love it that my country protects me from people like you who engage in financial fraud. I wish that it protected me immediately. I wish that those laws were self-enforcing. I have learned through 17 hard years that this is not the way it works. But I still love it that I live in a country that has such laws and I retain confidence that those laws will be recognized in good and effective and life-affirming ways in days to come.

Proud (and Rightfully So!) Rob

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

“I am still going to be doing the honest-posting thing. So how are you Goons better off?”

We are already just fine. We post honestly instead of trying to convince people about being perceived as honest (when you are not). We don’t need to seek revenge and call people names like you do. We decided long ago to keep working and saving so that we don’t have to struggle in retirement. I can’t imagine having to go back to work st your age after being out of the market for so long.

Okay, Anonymous.

I do wish you all good things, in any event.

Hang in there, my good friend.

In-a-Bad-Spot Rob

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

Have you started your job search?

I have not.

I am working on what I consider the eighth draft of the book. I count the collection of the material that I put in the 30 binders that used to be in my basement as Draft One. I count the exploration of the ideas on internet discussion boards that I participated in after I put forward my famous post of May 13, 2002, as Draft Two. I count the writing of full-length articles at this site (which forced me to organize and expand my thinking more than I did to write discussion-board posts) as Draft Three. I count the recording of the 200 one-hour podcasts that I recorded in 2009 (in the days following the initiation of the economic crisis) as Draft Four. I count my first stab at writing a full book (in which the ideas were not yet sufficiently developed for the book to possess a high level of clarity and flow) as Draft Five.

I count the 11,000 word article (“Buy-and-Hold Is Dangerous”) that I wrote near the end of last year to summarize all that I have learned in one complete and concise statement of the case as Draft Six. I wrote Draft Seven, which is largely organized but still somewhat scattered thoughts placed in chapters (the chapter titles are a lock at this point — just making final decisions on chapter titles is a big organizational advance) but without good enough narrative flow, earlier this year. I am now working on Draft Eight, which will have the proper narrative flow.

I am getting through roughly a chapter per week. I expect to finish that by Labor Day. Draft Nine is for fine-tuning. I want to give myself two months for that. Draft Nine is for proof-reading. I want to give myself a month for that (I had to read through my book on saving 40 times before I was able to get through the entire thing without making a single fix — that’s when I knew that it was ready [I only identified one missing comma after it was printed). That would get me to December 1. Then I give myself a month of slack time to finish by the end of the year.

I expect that I will put out some feelers re a job when I have finished this draft and have only the fine-tuning and proofing drafts remaining. If I don’t immediately get a job, which is the likely scenario, then I will continue with the book-writing until it is complete. If I hear about a job that I don’t want to pass up, I will grab it but then the only work that will be remaining on the book will be fine-tuning and proofing. Those are tasks that don’t require a huge amount of mental energy, so I would have no concern that I wouldn’t be able to complete those tasks at the end of a full work day (I would be concerned that I would not be able to complete the work that I am doing today in an effective and timely way while also holding a full-time job). So I would be okay with accepting a job from September 1 forward.

If I haven’t found a job by the end of the year, then I would of course lower my standards a bit re what I would accept to bring myself more into line with what the job market is offering me at this stage of my life. Until the book is complete, my intent is to accept only a job that represents a very good fit. That’s the current plan, in any event. I like to have a plan. But I also try to adapt to changing circumstances. So none of this is written in stone.

My best wishes to you.

Book-Writing Rob

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

If someone came to you today and said they wanted to invest their life savings of $5 million by following the VII strategy, what specific investments and percentage allocations would you give them as a recommendation?

I like that question. It seems down-to-earth and real.

I only feel competent to address one question, Anonymous. Are stock prices determined by rational assessments or by emotional inclinations? There are lots of smart people around who address themselves to all of the hundreds of other important issues that arise in discussions of stock investing and I prefer that people looking for guidance turn to those others over me because I don’t believe that I possess any special expertise re any of those matters.

That said, I believe that the valuations/emotions question is BY FAR the most important investing question. It is also the most ignored investing question. The valuations/emotions question is the undiscovered continent of investing analysis. There is nothing more important in any market than the exercise of price discipline and, without an understanding of the valuations/emotions question, it is not possible for the stock buyer to exercise price discipline effectively when buying stocks. I would say that getting a handle on the valuations/emotions question is 70 percent of the story of how to become a successful long-term stock investor. It is one question but it is the one question that is so important and so poorly understood today that getting a handle on that one question provides the investor with 70 percent of what he needs to know to achieve his goals.

And I not so humbly submit that I am the world’s leading expert on that one important question. I didn’t set out to become the world expert on valuations/emotions. I was just some guy at a discussion board on early retirement who didn’t want to see my friends suffer failed retirements and thus worked up the courage to point out that the study that they were using to prepare their retirement plans lacked a valuations adjustment despite 21 years (at that time) of peer-reviewed research showing that one is required to get the numbers right. The reactions that I saw to that post told me that I was on to something “revolutionary,” to use Shiller’s word.

I saw intense positive reactions (many people told me that I was the first person who ever talked about stock investing in a way that made complete sense to them) and I saw intense negative reactions (a greater number either advanced death threats or tolerated those who advanced death threats in their presence). I knew when I saw those reactions that the story of how as a society we have for decades avoided exploring the far-reaching implications of Shiller’s work was the biggest story that I was ever going to stumble upon and that, if I truly believed that journalism is a noble calling (I do or I wouldn’t have made it my life’s work), then I had better get about the business of nailing this one down.

I have now spent 17 years of my life doing just that. I think that I have done a good job. I of course did not do it on my own. I had help from thousands of fine people, including some of the biggest-name experts in the field and lots of ordinary folks who just want to gain a better understanding of how to invest in stocks with less risk and with a good chance of earning far higher returns in the long run. I have told the story. I have been denied the readership that my work merits because of the corruption that has come to dominate this field in the Buy-and-Hold Era. But I believe that as a society we will be dealing with that corruption in the days following the next price crash. And then the work that I have done will be helping millions of people in a very big way. Shiller’s research changes everything. Absolutely everything. And I am the only guy walking Planet Earth today who can tell the story with the depth and detail with which it is told on the pages of this web site, So good for me (and good for all the people who have helped out — that includes you Goons!), you know?

So I know something very, very very important. And I know it in great detail and in great depth. But I know only one thing (the valuations/emotions thing). If I venture outside of my area of expertise, all that I am going to do is to mess people up. So the wise course of action for me is to keeping hitting away at the one big thing that I know better than anyone else while taking a pass on the hundreds of things that lots of others know better than me.

That’s preface.

I would tell that person that valuations matter and why I believe that and then try to answer any questions that he had or to address any concerns that he had. Does that answer your question?

I don’t believe that there is one answer to your question. I write for the average person. So I recommend index funds. I am persuaded by arguments that were advanced by Jack Bogle (one of my heroes) that index funds are the best choice for the average investor. I would refer people to Bogle’s writings for more detail on why index funds are best for the average person. But I would make that recommendation.

I would of course tell the person that, while investing in index funds as Bogle recommended, they need to take valuations into consideration when setting their stock allocation, which Bogle did not recommend. So I would not just say “do whatever Bogle said.” I would say to do what Bogle said re the many questions that Bogle got right but to not do what Bogle said re the very important question that Bogle got terribly wrong. If the person wanted to know why I am so sure that Bogle got that one important question so terribly wrong, I would tell him. But I would suggest that he read Bogle’s work to gain a good understanding of why index funds are a good choice because I think that Bogle handles that one perfectly well and probably better than I could (since I learned most of what I know about that topic from reading Bogle’s work).

What if the person were a more sophisticated investor, one who believed that he is capable of picking stocks effectively? I would tell him to go for it and wish him luck. I would warn him that investors can fool themselves about their abilities to pick stocks. Bogle pointed out that reality and I think he was right to do so. But I do believe that there are some investors who have the ability to add to their returns by picking stocks effectively and so I would tell the guy that and suggest that he check out all the people who offer good advice on how to do that. I don’t believe that I have much to offer in that area and so I would not say more than that.

Does that answer the question?

I would certainly recommend a lower stock allocation than what is generally recommended today because stock valuations are so scary high today. I would not recommend a stock allocation of zero unless the person was in highly unusual circumstances (as am I). I would recommend 30 percent stocks in the usual case. The reason is that short-term timing does not work and thus it is possible that we will see prices shoot up over the next year or two and I think it is better psychologically if the investor gets to share in those gains to some extent in the event that that happens. So 30 percent stocks would be my general recommendation.

I like TIPS and IBonds and CDs for the non-stock portion of the portfolio. But I am okay with other options for investors who have a strong desire to go with other options. I was talking with a friend about these matters about two weeks ago and I persuaded him that most experts are not giving due consideration to valuations. He hated the idea of going with TIPS or IBonds or CDs because he believes that the returns available from those asset classes today are too small. So he came up with the idea of moving a good portion of his money to high-dividend-paying stocks. He wanted me to endorse that choice. I did not do it.

I said that it made a good bit of sense to me. I said that I could imagine endorsing it if lots of people who believe that valuations matter studied it and came to the conclusion that it is a good choice. But I said that as of today I have not seen enough research on and discussion of that particular question to put my name to an endorsement. I did not oppose the idea. But I just don’t feel sure enough that that is the way to go to put my name to an endorsement. I feel sure that valuations matter. So I endorse valuation-informed strategies. But I believe that more study is needed re lots of follow-up questions. That’s why I always argue for the launching of a national debate re these matters.

I hope that that helps at least a tiny bit, my dear friend.

My best and warmest wishes to you and yours.

World Expert (re One Question Only!) Rob

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

If another 20 years passes and you don’t get your story in The New York Times and you don’t see a dime of the $500 million payout, will you come to the conclusion that you wasted your time?

I think that another 20 years would just about do it, Anonymous. I am a stubborn cuss. But a person struggling to make his way through this mixed-up world of ours has to strive to be at least a tiny bit realistic.

No?

Flexible Rob

Can you afford to wait that long?

My primary project today is writing the book Investing for Humans: How to Get What Works on Paper to Work in Real Life. I expect to finish that by the end of the year. At that time, my intent is to seek employment in the corporate world. I will continue to write my weekly column and to respond to blog comments and to contact other sites at nights and on weekends. I can continue doing that indefinitely even if there is not money coming in from the investing work.

Rob

Job market is great right now. Why not go back to the corporate world now while things are good versus risking a potential down market in the future?

My most valuable asset is the 17 years of material that I house here at the site that tells the story of what the last 38 years of peer-reviewed research teaches us all about how stock investing works in the real world. My top priority is to protect and develop that asset. Finishing the book is a huge advance in that area. So that needs to come first.

Rob

What kind of job will you look for?

I’ve been out of the job market for a long time. I cannot be super choosy. I will be looking for editing jobs or low level jobs in the legal field.

Rob

You can go get a job now, to help avoid your own failure and finish your book during nights and weekends.

That’s not my intent. I have a lot riding on getting this story out and I believe that there’s going to be a big opportunity to get people to listen in the days following the next price crash, when millions of people will be hurting and looking for explanations. So I don’t want to take any chances on not having the book ready to go when the next crash comes. And of course I don’t know when that is going to be. So my aim is just to get it all down in a way that satisfies my high standards and then move on to the job thing.

It’s possible that I could finish the book prior to the end of the year. In that event I could seek employment a few months sooner. However, I don’t want to count on that. Things have been going well. But my experience with big projects is that unexpected obstacles always come into play before you get to the finish line.

I naturally wish you the best of luck in all your future life endeavors.

Rob