A Rich Life

The Old Ideas on Saving & Investing Don't Work -- Here's What Does

Greaney Goon to Rob: “Your Communication Is Often Abrasive and Your Behavior Is Horrible. You Make Outrageous Claims As to What You Have Accomplished Despite Contrary Evidence and Then Compare Yourself to Well-Known Historical Figures.”

by

Set forth below is the text of a comment that one of the Greaney Goons put to another blog entry at this site:

Rob,

Here are just a few reason why your website is not successful:

You can’t back up your statements with facts (linking to your own comments are not facts)

When faced with facts that are documented by others that you do not agree with, you ignore them or delete the posts.

Your communication is often abrasive and your behavior is horrible.

You make silly unfounded threats, such as lawsuits and prison time, which make people conclude that you are a crackpot.

You make outrageous claims as to what you say you have accomplished, despite contrary evidence and then compare yourself to well known historical figures.

Everything to you is a made up conspiracy theory, when the fact remains that you have been shunned due to your behavior. There are people posting everyday that have disagreements and banning does not take place. Your behavior led people to have no other choice but to ban you.

You lack any personal success or track record.

You make long winded replies repeating the same nonsense over and over again, yet ignore any response.

You have caused extensive harm to many people, but most notably, Wade. You lack any morals or ethics in which your personal campaign trumps the ability of Wade to have a normal life on the Internet.

“There Is No Other Blogger on the Internet Who Has Won Even a Tiny Percentage of the Positive Comments from Big-Name Experts That I Have Won. A Person Isn’t Given that Kind of Endorsement. A Person EARNS It with Hard Work and a Hard-Won Reputation for Integrity.”

by

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

It is funny what you call an endorsement. Many of those comments ate not very positive.

I included some Goon comments so that people can see what we are up against.

And I included some comments by skeptical Normals. Because there are lots of good and smart people who possess a sincere skepticism and their views obviously need to be heard.

But the vast majority of the comments are INSANELY positive, Pink.

There is no other blogger on the internet who has won even a tiny percentage of the positive comments from big-name experts that I have won, Pink.

Rob Arnott is the former editor of the Financial Analysts Journal, the most important journal in this field. He says of me: “Your ideas are sound.”

He doesn’t say that about Jack Bogle or about Bill Bernstein or about Larry Swedroe or about Rick Ferri.

A person isn’t given that kind of endorsement. A person EARNS it with hard work and a hard-won reputation for integrity.

You hate me because you believe that there is zero chance that you could ever win an endorsement of one-tenth that importance in this lifetime.

I say you are wrong. I say you could begin posting honestly today and end up somewhere very magical five years from today or ten years from today or whenever.

But all I can do is make the suggestion, Pink. It is you who determines what path you will walk as you create your own future.

That’s as it should be, in my assessment.

I naturally wish you all the best that this life has to offer a person.

Rob the Sound

Ken Evoy, Owner of SiteSell, Inc.: “Rob, Awesome Post. I Suggest All Read It, Some Sharp, Creative Thinking. Trying to “Be There” Before the Gold Rush to a New Niche Is an Interesting Bet! You’ll Be THE Name If It Happens. Heck, You Might Even Help MAKE It Happen!”

by

ISet forth below is the text of a post that I put to the SiteSell (a web hosting company) forum, followed by the response of SiteSell Owner Ken Evoy:

I believe that the path forward is to move away from the idea that there is one right way to build a successful site and to position SBI as a company that helps one-person shops build successful sites in a variety of ways.My site never fit the SBI model. I write about personal finance. That’s a huge topic with a huge amount of competition, certainly not the sort of niche that SBI advises its customer’s to pursue. There is a sense in which I am filling a niche — I employ behavioral finance insights that have to a large extent been ignored by the “experts” in the saving and investing fields. So my site is 100 percent unique and I really am a little guy going up against the big guys. But I don’t try to beat them by covering a smaller universe of subject matters. My hope is that behavioral finance insights will gain in popularity and that will pull enough people to my site for it to gain traction and then word of mouth will do the rest because the material is so good. If it happens (it hasn’t yet but I believe there is cause for optimism in the hugely enthusiastic support I have won among a small number of big names in the field), I will have won something bigger than just authority in a niche. It’s a riskier strategy than the usual SiteSell strategy, to be sure. But the payoff will be correspondingly big if the bet pays off.I knew that SBI was about developing niche material when I joined. So why did I sign up? I know that there are too many things to know about getting a business going on the internet for anyone to do it without help. I wanted to form relationships with others pursuing similar (but not the same) goals and learn from them (while also teaching them when I had something to offer in return). For example, I might want to create a PDF report to sell at my site and know nothing about how to do it. Someone with a niche site could share that knowledge with me. An area that I am strong in is getting expert endorsements. Perhaps I could share information on how to do that in return.I have nothing against the conventional SiteSell strategy. It obviously worked very well for a good number of people for a good amount of time. But I never felt that it was the only way to go and I always felt frustrated that it was hard to gain traction here with discussions of alternative strategies. I set up lots of pages that have no good keywords attached to them. That was the right thing for me to do because those pages explore strategies that I need to describe but that no one else in the personal finance field has written about. That’s a good thing for me! The fact that my work is unique is what gives it potential power even if Google changes its ranking rules (my unique saving and investing strategies can gain favor at FaceBook or Twitter or wherever). So I was right to write those pages. I often felt like a fool, though, because those pages did not fit the system and have not yet brought in visitors. If I become popular enough, they might bring in visitors in a later day. I created those pages as part of a long-term strategy.

My strategy is not one that many others are likely to pursue. But there are lots of possible variations both of the SiteSell way and of my way and of lots of other ways. David at the Cornhole site often talks about going for a small number of high-interest visitors rather than a large number of medium-interest visitors. I think that can be a good strategy for some niches. There are lots of other possibilities.

I understand why the conventional SiteSell approach had such appeal once upon a time. Google really ranked sites that followed the system well. The trouble (in my view!) is that not so long a time ago there was no Google. Google itself lacks a long history in which it determined for sure how rankings should be done. So ranking rules remain highly fluid rules. There is no one system that can be sure to work for a long time. It’s possible that three years from now Google will switch back to its old way of doing things. It’s possible that it will follow some entirely new path. It’s possible that some entirely new entity will replace Google. We don’t know.

Given that we don’t know, it is my belief that there are numerous possible paths for smart people to follow. That’s scary. If there is no one way sure to work, then there is a lot of risk attached to this site-building business. I think that there’s a lot of risk and that we all need to accept that going in. It would be fair to say that some strategies are less risky than others. And it would make sense to indicate to people what those strategies are. But given the riskiness of the entire endeavor, I think it is a mistake to believe that there is one strategy that is superior for all one-person-shop site builders.

Rob
http://www.PassionSaving.com

Ken Evoy’s Response:
Rob, awesome post…I suggest all read it, some sharp creative thinking.Trying to “be there” before the gold rush to a new niche is an interesting bet! You’ll be THE name if it happens. Heck, you might even help MAKE it happen!Re this…

[quote]I set up lots of pages that have no good keywords attached to them.[/b]

Yes, that’s the way folks should evolve. Much like golf, you should stop thinking of the mechanics of the swing at some point and just swing.

Many SBIers, once they are trained and the site is starting to flesh out, relax and are ready to just add great subject matter regardless of keyword.

You don’t need to be in your “ahead of the market” situation to do that, Rob.

But I don’t think we ever actually suggest that, Rob, so it’s a good point to add a point that, as you get used to the process, just relax and go with the flow of delivering a great user experience.

It’s possible to slavishly follow the AG “too much.” I can see that many would also NOT think to just “relax and swing.” You can’t break your site by delivering unique content. I think of it this way…

Demand is what people THINK of searching for (i.e., you follow their lead). NOT to build pages about Anguilla villas, Anguilla hotels, etc., would be foolish for a fairly tight niche like Anguilla. But adding articles about folks who have weekend in-house open kitchens (something she’s working on) is the type of unique and original information that pop people’s eyes once they are on your site.

Naturally, you’ll include the page in your zine, feed and FB post, reinforcing your reputation as a provider of information to follow.

We’ll build this concept up and add it to the Action Guide….

If you think your readers would enjoy it even if it’s not in the MKL, do it. It’s not so much about longtail search (although you’ll get a bit of that) as it is about the bigger concepts mentioned above.

We’ll add that. Thanks very much for bringing it up!

“I Believe That What I Have Done in the Investing Field Can Be Done in Lots of Fields By People Possessing a Reasonable Amount of Intelligence (All That I Possess) Who Take Advantage of Opportunities Created by the Creation of the Internet”

by

Set forth below is the text of a comment that I recently posted to the Suckers Buy It! forum:

The purpose of this thread-starter is to offer some ideas on how blog and site owners can obtain big-name endorsements for their work. The obvious benefit of doing so is that big-name endorsements give you the credibility you need to persuade customers to buy your products and services. They can also help you obtain citations in big-name media outlets, which can generate traffic gains.

I have a slide show at the upper right-hand side of my home page that sets forth my 15 most important endorsements:

http://www.passionsaving.com/index.html

A more complete collection of them is set forth at the “People Are Talking” section of my “A Rich Life” blog, which runs down the left-hand side of each page of the blog:

http://arichlife.passionsaving.com/

I need to tell a little of the story of where the state of knowledge of how stock investing works stands today to explain how I obtained these endorsements. There are two models for understanding how stock investing works: (1) The Buy-and-Hold Model, which is rooted in the research of University of Chicago Economics Professor Eugene Fama and which has been the dominant model for several decades; and (2) The Valuation-Informed Indexing Model (I gave it that name), which is rooted in the research of Yale University Economic Professor Robert Shiller. The allocation strategies that follow from the two models are VERY different.

Few people have ever heard of the new VII model or are able to appreciate quickly how it works. But there is now 32 years of peer-reviewed research supporting it. In contrast, there is no research supporting the Buy-and-Hold Model. Lots of smart and good people think there is. But if Shiller is right, the Buy-and-Hold Model was rooted in a mistaken interpretation of the historical return data. Interpreted properly, none of the data available to us today supports Buy-and-Hold ([presuming that you believe in the VII Model).

Shiller is a well-respected figure. He wrote the book Irrational Exuberance, which was a best-seller and which was reviewed at most of the top-name publications. I discovered some years back an amazing reality: No one has ever explored the practical implications of Shiller’s findings. Shiller discusses only theory in his book; it contains not a word on how to invest effectively. And there is not one web site today other than my own that explores the practical significance of his findings. I have had this field to myself for 11 years now.

That’s why I have been able to obtain all these powerful endorsements. I believe that what I have done in the investing field can be done in lots of fields by people possessing a reasonable amount of intelligence (all that I possess) who take advantage of opportunities created by the creation of the internet.

What I do is bounce ideas off people. I started with things that seemed to be obviously true. For example, I found that a calculation (the safe withdrawal rate) that millions of people have used to plan their retirements is in error. I went to discussion boards and blogs and asked people whether they were able to explain why the studies were set up the way they were (they excluded from consideration a key factor — the valuation level that applies on the day the retirement begins). At first, I assumed that I must have missed something. But when I saw lots of smart people were not able to respond effectively to my inquiries, I came to accept that I really was on to something.

Then I went higher. I started writing to columnists at major newspapers and that sort of thing. Sometimes I got hostile responses. Again, that told me that I was onto something. Other times I got helpful feedback. That of course helped me to put pieces of the puzzle together. Never did I obtain reasonable explanations of why the valuations factor was excluded from consideration. So I grew more and more confident that there was some strange stuff going on.

I now believe that strange stuff like this probably is going on in all sorts of areas. We are cowed by “experts.” Lots of times experts are just people who learned to repeat back what they read in a book written years ago. We are learning new things all the time. But the new knowledge often does not get put to use because people do not see any immediate financial benefit in putting it to use (that is the issue in the investing realm — I am virtually certain today that Shiller is right but people have not wanted to say so because for the time being there are marketing benefits associated with going with the Fama model).

My biggest success came as a result of posts that I put to the Bogleheads Forum. A researcher named Wade Pfau never posted to the forum at the time but he was as a lurker reading my posts with great interest. He eventually wrote to me to ask if I would be willing to work with him to develop research that he and I believe may someday down the road win a Nobel prize. We worked together for 16 months and the research paper has been published in a peer-reviewed journal. We showed that by adjusting their stock allocations in response to valuation changes investors can reduce the risk of stock investing by 70 percent. If that finding holds up (all signs are that it will), it is going to change all that we know about stock investing in a fundamental way.

The trick here is to come to the subject you write about with the perspective of a journalist rather than a marketer. Marketing is what generally wins on the internet. I made my living as a journalist for years before starting my site — So I have the head of a journalist. Journalists don’t tend to look for what is popular or what sells. We look for what is important in a long-term sense. We have an inclination to ask lots of annoying questions. We don’t buy it when authority figures try to give us the run around. We drill down until we figure things out, until we can put a narrative together that solves all the puzzles that trouble us.

I couldn’t have done what I have done in pre-internet days. The internet allows me easily to contact people all over the globe. When I was in communication with Wade, we would often send several e-mails back and forth to each other in a single day. Things would have moved forward at a deadly slow pace if we hadn’t been able to do that. Also, I have had a level of access to big names that I would not have had in earlier days. I announced one day that I was going to appear at the next annual meeting of the Bogleheads community to ask John Bogle some questions. The leaders of the board took the entire board down from the Morningstar site so that they could ban me and “protect” Bogle. That told me that Bogle does not believe that he can give effective answers to my questions.

That’s the basic idea. If anyone has questions, I am happy to help in any way that I can.

Rob

“I Had a Discussion About This With My Mother Shortly Before She Died. She Said That Maybe All That I Am Trying to Teach People Is Going To Become Widely Accepted After My Death. Oh, Great!….I Pray That I Have the Courage to Accept God’s Plan Here Without Too Much Whining.”

by

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

hopefully for your sake you have more of a plan than praying.

God helps those who help themselves, What. So I certainly need to work it myself in addition to saying my prayers.

But it is in God’s hands, not mine. If God doesn’t mean for this to happen, it’s not going to happen, no matter how hard I work it.

I had a discussion about this with my mother shortly before she died. She said that maybe all that I am trying to teach people is going to become widely accepted after my death. Oh, great! I hate that idea.

It was just like my mom to say that, though. My favorite trait of hers is that she was not one to sugarcoat. So I have to accept that she might be right.

Now –

Why would God do that to me? It sounds almost like a trick.

It could be that He wanted me to learn patience or compassion. There might be some lesson in all this that I am today oblivious to that I can only become aware of by experiencing whatever I will be experiencing as the days move on. Perhaps I really will be put to death, you know? Perhaps there is some lesson that I can only learn by being put to death and God knows that it is only re this issue that I could ever possess the courage needed for things to reach that point (the issue of standing by your friends on the internet really does touch me in a way that not too many other issues do).

If that’s God’s plan, that’s God’s plan. I don’t want it to be so, I don’t like the idea one little bit. But I pray that I have the courage to accept God’s plan here without too much whining.

I don’t control the world, What. I don’t pretend to. I am some guy who figured out how to get posts to appear on internet discussion boards, nothing more and nothing less. I don’t think that I even possess a master plan, in the way you suggest. The plan I follow is that I wake up each morning, turn on my computer, handle what is in front of me that day, turn off the computer and go to sleep. I try as hard as I can to understand the other fellow’s point of view and to be kind and polite when doing it. I also try to be firm about honesty on important matters, not to give in to pressures applied to me to get me to say things I don’t believe to be so. That’s the plan, in summary form.

Following that plan has taken me to some mighty strange places over the past 11 years. I’ve seen amazing things, both positive and negative. I’ve never been under the illusion that I controlled how things turn out. I control one tiny little piece of the world, the posts that show up under the name “Rob Bennett.” That’s all.

I do believe that God put me here to do this work. He doesn’t speak to me in a direct way. I hear him speaking to me in an indirect way and that’s the message I hear. But I’ve been wrong about that sort of thing before and it could be that it’s happening again. But I personally believe that God put me here to do this work all the same.

I don’t pray often. But I do on occasion pray for help and courage. I would phrase things the opposite of the way you did. I would say that I need to continue exerting my efforts but that I need to accept that those efforts will not be nearly enough, that I am not going to prevail here without God’s help. I would say that I would be foolish to think that my efforts alone are going to be sufficient.

Safe withdrawal rates matter, What. I believe that. But I also believe that in the grand scheme of things they may not matter all that much. It could be that in the grand scheme there are things going on here that matter more than the investing topics matter. Thinking along those lines gets a bit too cosmic for me, so I don’t spend much time doing it. But I think that’s a possibility. I certainly think it would be a terrible mistake for me to make safe withdrawal rates so important that I would be unkind to you or one of my other Goon friends. I don’t believe that I have ever been unkind to any of you and I certainly pray that I never cross that line.

Enough!

Take good care, my old friend.

Rob

“People Won’t Tell You to Your Face That You Are an Ass. You Admit That You Have Been Doing This for 11 Years. Do You Notice That Your Message Is Not Going Anywhere? Wake Up, Rob!

by

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

Rob,

Even us unicorns know that people won’t tell you to your face that you are an ass. People, on the whole, will be polite in face to face discussions. There is no evidence of a vast conspiracy. You have been banned from so many sites because of your actions and demeanor. It is clear you are wrong and you made that more evident when you called Wade a liar. Additionally, my personal experience also shows you to lack credibility when you lied about me. There is clear evidence that you lie about others on here on a regular basis as we can look at their posts and watch you respond.

You admit that you have been doing this for 11 years. Do you notice that your message is not going anywhere, yet you have some delusion that it will go “viral”.

Wake up, Rob!

People who think you are an ass don’t say to you “your site is the best site I have seen in this area, I just love your investing ideas and have read every article you have written in an effort to learn more about them.” Give me a friggin’ break, Pink.

Now, the person that sent that message to me (I paraphrased but that was indeed the message) ALSO banned me from his site. So there are bits and pieces of what you say that are so. But the explanation of the EXCEEDINGLY strange situation is not that people think I am an ass. The explanation is that even the smartest people in this field are afraid today to go public with their doubts about Buy-and-Hold.

Whether there is a “conspiracy” or not depends on how you use the word. There are not people meeting in smoke-filled rooms plotting all this. But there are lots of people behaving in a similar manner when faced with similar sorts of circumstances. That’s been demonstrated THOUSANDS of times at this point.

You say I have been banned because of my “actions and demeanor.” Yes and no. It is an ACTION to report the safe withdrawal rate accurately. It is part of my DEMEANOR that I offer no apology for having done so when Buy-and-Holders react with anger. If that is what you mean by saying that my action and demeanor caused my bans, then sure, you are right.

How the heck do you think we are ever going to make the transition from Buy-and-Hold to Valuation-Informed Indexing without someone advancing that sort of action and demeanor, Pink? We need to get from Point A to Point B. It doesn’t happen if I say “oh, here’s my personal withdrawal rate” and then leave the discussion. I need to say “calculations of the safe withdrawal rate that do not contain an adjustment for the valuation level that applies on the start-date of the retirement are in error.” It is that statement that the Buy-and-Holders consider an action and a demeanor that cannot be tolerated. I am trying to REPLACE Buy-and-Hold with Valuation-Informed Indexing. The Buy-and-Holders are trying to defend Buy-and-Hold. We are working at cross purposes.

I have every right in the world to tell millions of middle-class people what they need to know to lose confidence in Buy-and-Hold. The move from Buy-and-Hold to Valuation-Informed Indexing is the biggest advance we have achieved as a people in the history of investing analysis. So please don’t suffer any illusions that I am going to back off that project. That is the project that I have been pursuing since the morning of May 13, 2002. With great pride. With great tenacity. With great diligence. With great hope. With great love.

I hope that part is crystal clear at this point. Please don’t ever suggest again that there might be some future date at which I would agree to say things in some gibberish way that would cause the Buy-and-Holders to let me post on the internet but that would not permit me to get the message out to millions of middle-class investors that the millions of middle-class investors very much need to hear. Those are my people, Pink. Those are my friends. I am going to get this message out to those people or I am going to die trying. There is zero chance of any deals being worked out re that point. Please give up that stupid, pointless dream!

Wade will be tried to a court of law. He will present his evidence and the state will present its evidence. That’s the way the system works. I will do everything in my power to spin things in Wade’s favor. I will not commit perjury. Fair enough?

I will handle things in precisely the same manner in your trial. Obviously the things I say will be different because the realities are different. But the spirit in which I will approach my obligation to testify will be the same in both cases. The rule I follow is to be as honest as it is possible to be without crossing an important line and becoming uncharitable while also being as charitable as it is possible to be without crossing another important line and becoming dishonest. That’s the story re that one.

Your take on the 11-year history couldn’t possibly be more different than my own, Pink. I have accomplished things over these 11 years that I never would have dared dream possible. I had a conversation just yesterday with a woman who is doing some technical work on my site. She marveled over the endorsements I have obtained. I was humbled. If you had told me back when I was a boy growing up in Northeast Philadelphia that scores of the biggest names in the personal finance field would be saying the sorts of things that scores of the biggest names in the personal finance field have said about Rob Bennett’s investing work over the past 11 years, I would have said that you were 100 percent loco nutso mixed-up crazytown. And yet here we are.

I am 100 percent convinced that the message will go viral, Pink. I have zero doubt.

I worry that it will take a Second Great Depression to make it happen. That prospect scares me to death. So I don’t mean to suggest that I am comfortable about where things stand today. I am not even a tiny bit comfortable. I am very concerned about where things stand today.

But I do not CONTROL that question. I have to accept that things are how things are. It is not my call. There are other people who have to get involved to make good things happen and, as of this morning, those other people have not elected to get involved. That’s the story there.

If Shiller is right (there is now a mountain of evidence that he is), the next price crash is going to put us in the Second Great Depression. That can be proven with numbers, Pink. If you don’t think that news that we are in Second Great Depression and that the Wall Street Con Men’s decisions to continue pumping out this Buy-and-Hold garbage for 32 years after the peer-reviewed academic research showed that there is precisely zero chance that it could ever work for a single long-term investor is going to go viral, then you are a dang fool. No personal offense intended. I know of no softer words to convey the essential point.

I’m awake, Pink. I was awake on the morning of May 13, 2002. Getting the numbers that people use to plan their retirements right matters. I am not guessing. I am SURE.

I naturally wish you all the best things that this life has to offer, my old friend.

Rob

“I Am the Most Knowledgeable Person Today on the Subject of How Average Middle-Class People Should Invest in Stocks Not Because I Spent 20 Years in School or Possess a Genius Level I.Q. It Is Because I am Honest. That Gives Me a Huge Edge in a Field that Is 100 Percent Corrupt.”

by

Set forth below is the text of a comment that I recently put to the blog at this site:

I think millions would disagree with your level of knowledge versus those you have listed.

Millions would disagree with what I say about my level of knowledge TODAY, Pink. We agree re that one.

How about tomorrow? What happens tomorrow matters.

Bogle does not believe that he can respond effectively to my questions about Buy-and-Hold, Pink. We know that beyond any reasonable doubt.

I announced plans to ask Bogle questions at one of the Bogleheads annual meetings and he responded fearfully. And, when Rob Arnott copied Jack on his e-mail to me saying that my views on investing are “sound.,” Jack did not respond. Nor has Jack responded to my e-mails to him.

Jack sees the entire Buy-and-Hold house of cards collapsing before his eyes and can’t figure out where to turn.

What are the millions going to say about who is better informed re the realities of stock investing following the next price crash, Pink? I think it is fair to say that there will be few calling Bogle an “expert” tomorrow. And, once word gets out all across the internet that I discovered the errors in the Old School safe withdrawal rate studies a full 10 years before any of the big-name “experts” in this field, who do you think is going to be perceived as the true expert in the eyes of millions of middle-class investors?

Now –

The full truth is that people will be overstating my expertise then as much as they are understating it today. That’s unfortunate. The reality is that I know lots of things that Bogle and Bernstein and Swedroe do not know. But Bogle and Bernstein and Swedroe also know lots of things that I do not know.

If those guys were as smart as they pretend to be, they would acknowledge what they do not know. They would stop playing this stupid little-boy game of pretending that they knew it all on the day they were born. Everyone sees through that garbage. Many have been reluctant to say they see through it for so long as they have continued hoping that Buy-and-Hold might work out okay for the first time in history. But, if Buy-and-Hold destroys as many lives this time as it has on every earlier occasion it was tried, millions are going to acknowledge that they have at least suspected for a long time now that a lot of the “experts” possess an expertise primarily in marketing.

Get Rich Quick sells, Pink. I get that loud and clear.

Research-based strategies work.

I am the most knowledgeable person today on the subject of how average middle-class people should invest in stocks not because I spent 20 years in school or possess a genius level I.Q. I am the most knowledgeable todaybecause I am honest, because I care about what will happen to the people who will follow my advice.

That’s gives me a huge edge in a field that I think can fairly be described as 100 percent corrupt today, Any field in which errors in retirement studies have been publicly revealed but not corrected for 11 years is 100 percent corrupt. No?

I ain’t no great shakes in my knowledge of stock investing. And, in fairness, I learned most of what I know from people like Bogle and Bernstein and Swedroe. But the full reality here is that I am 11 years ahead of those guys today. Because when I saw the reluctance of the Buy-and-Holders to acknowledge their errors, I abandoned ship and got about the business of figuring out why the “experts” in this field are so arrogant and puffed-up and defensive.

It’s not all a math exercise.

Honesty matters. Caring about what happens to the people who follow your advice matters.

This is a field in which you can quickly go to the head of the class just by being honest and by caring about what happens to the people who follow your advice.

I look forward to the day when my good friends Jack and Bill and Larry catch up to me and then surpass me. Nothing would make me happier. I pray every day for that to happen.

Rob

“I Have Engaged in Hard Self-Evaluation Every Day for 10 Years Running Now. I Have Come to the Conclusion That It Is Possible That I Am Wrong.”

by

Set forth below is the text of a comment that I recent put to a discussion thread at this blog: 

I agree in full with the first two points you make here and in part with the third, Sparky.

I am 100 percent confident that many of the recipients of my e-mails find the e-mail campaign an odd way of spreading the word. How can I be so sure? I find it an odd way of proceeding MYSELF. If the person sending the e-mails finds it an odd way of proceeding, how could at least a significant percentage of those receiving them not feel the same?

And I certainly agree that the vast majority of people do not share my views on investing. If they did, stocks couldn’t possibly be priced as they are today. So that one also is settled.

Your third point is that I should do some hard self-evaluation and consider the possibility that I am wrong.

I agree 100 percent with those words as stated. I have engaged in hard self-evaluation every day for 10 years running now. So I obviously agree with you that this is needed. And I have come to the conclusion that it is possible that I am wrong. I’ve been wrong before. I thought I was right on those occasions. If it happened those times, why would it not be possible that it is happening again?

The part re which I disagree is unspoken but implicit in your words.

Your implicit suggestion is that I should stop sending the e-mails.

No.

That would be a terrible, terrible, terrible choice for me to make.

This is where YOU need to consider the possibility that it is YOU who are wrong.

If you are wrong, we have available to us today a means of reducing the risk of stock investing by 70 percent and we are not making use of it.

If you are wrong, we have caused an economic crisis because some Big Shots in this field were not able to work up the courage to acknowledge that what the academic research appeared to show 30 years ago no longer applies (something that all “experts” in this field should know as a result of their obligation to keep up with the new research as it appears).

If you are wrong, we have destroyed many fine discussion boards and blogs for no good reason whatsoever.

If you are wrong, many of our friends will be serving long prison terms following the next price crash. Huh? That makes sense? It’s not a close call, Sparky. That makes zero sense.

I could be wrong. You could be wrong. So it goes in this crazy, mixed-up world of ours.

Fortunately for us, we have as a society figured out a way to deal with this dilemma. We permit both sides to have their say. Then all the people interested in the subject listen in and decide for themselves. That way, as the case for an idea weakens, it is replaced by another, ultimately stronger idea.

That’s how we have to play it. I am not wrong re that one. That one is backed by all our cultural norms and indeed by our entire legal system and by thousands of years of human civilization. It’s not even remotely possible that I am wrong re that one.

Say that I really am wrong and that Buy-and-Hold is the ideal investing strategy. If that is so, Buy-and-Hold will survive any challenges that I or anyone else can present. The Buy-and-Hold idea will be stronger after it is vindicated than it is today. If Buy-and-Hold is the ideal strategy, that’s what you and I both want to see happen, no?

So let’s get to work, Sparky!

Let’s get that Ban on Honest Posting lifted at every discussion board and blog on the internet and let’s see Buy-and-Hold (or Valuation-Informed Indexing!) vindicated in the national debate that follows.

I look forward to working together with you and all of my other Buy-and-Hold friends to put all the ugliness behind us and to transform these discussions into helpful and fruitful and warm and friendly ones from this point forward.

Please let me know at what time today I should begin posting again to the Bogleheads Forum. I believe that it would be helpful if you would ask Mel to put up a “Welcome Back, Rob!” thread. That would set the right tone for where we all want to take this in coming days.

Thanks for hanging in there, my old friend!

Rob

“I Am Indeed Slow to Act. Some Interpret That As a Lack of Courage. My Take Is That It Is Better Understood As a Situational Kind of Courage. I Need to Be Very Sure Before I Become Unbending.”

by

Set forth below is the text of a comment that I recently put to the Goon Central board:

He’s all talk and no action.   He never does anything.

I am slow to act, GW. For good or for ill. If I were asked to give one word to describe my personality, it would be “methodical.” I like to be sure.

That’s why I was the first one to go public about the errors in the studies. I had noticed them years before. My guess is that lots of other people noticed them. I didn’t shoot my mouth off. But I didn’t stop thinking about them either. I thought and thought and thought. And when I felt that I knew enough to venture forward and say something, I ventured forward and said something.

It was the same with everything else.

It was the same with contacting Bogle. It was the same with sending the e-mails. It was the same with saying that Buy-and-Hold caused the economic crisis. It was the same with saying that the new research shows us that stocks are less risky than bonds and that we can reduce stock risk by 70 percent. It was the same with using the phrase “financial fraud” (I used that phrase in correspondence with an e-mail respondent the other day, the first time I recall using it somewhere other than here — I test things out here and then work up the courage to follow-up elsewhere). It was the same with making note of the prison sentences.

There are some lines that I will never cross. No matter how bad things get.

I am the leader re this matter. But FoolMeOnce  once made the point that being a leader doesn’t amount to much if you don’t have followers. FoolMeOnce wanted to be with me. But he was afraid because there were not lots of others publicly declaring that they wanted to be with me. Lots of people are like that.

If that never changes, my efforts will never succeed. This is not a one-man job.

You’ve got me re that one.

I think it will change. But I am not God. I’ve been wrong about lots of things. It could be that I am wrong about this.

However, if there comes a day when people show a willingness to follow, I will lead. I’ll be scared. I was scared when I put forward the May 13, 2002, post. I forced myself to push the “send” button. I’ll force myself to lead this effort where it needs to go for millions of people to feel safe saying what they truly believe about stock investing on EVERY board and blog on the internet. That’s the job. I will see it through to completion presuming that I someday have the number of followers required for this to be a viable proposition.

I don’t think of myself as being a person of great courage. If I had been a person of great courage, the May 13, 2002, post would have gone up in May of 2000.

But I am something. I follow through. When I commit myself to something, after pondering and pondering and pondering whether it is the right choice or not, I stock to that path in the face of relentless opposition. There have been one or two other turning points in my life in which similar events played out. I handled things in the same way. With love for the other side. With a great desire for compromise. But with a steel resolve not to betray the core mission, which I elected only after a great deal of pondering as to what was the right way to proceed.

It’s not my purpose here to brag. I am not saying how great I am or how strong I am. I am not predicting ultimate victory. Perhaps I will end up in the electric chair, like Greaney once predicted.

What I am saying is that, if I fail, it will not be because I did not follow through. I am slow to act. But I evidence determination in the actions I take. There’s something in the nature of the methodical person that makes him slow to act in cases in which he is not sure (which is most cases) and determined in cases in which he is sure (the small number of cases to which he has devoted so much thought that even his methodical soul is clear re what must be done).

I believe — based on my life story — that the methodical person is the most determined person once he has convinced himself that an action absolutely must be taken. People don’t see it that way because the methodical person so rarely sticks his neck out. But it is not really a lack of courage that causes the methodical person to generally refrain from sticking his neck out. It is a lack of certainty. The methodical person sees both sides of the story. So he is generally content to let the other guy — who seems so much more sure of himself — call the play. In those few cases in which the methodical person has directed enough mental energies to a matter to feel comfortable sticking his neck out, he is so sure that he cannot live with himself if he does not evidence follow-through.

That’s where I think things stand, in any event.

There are lines that I will never cross because I could never feel comfortable crossing them. I will never say “I know for certain that Valuation-Informed Indexing works” because I don’t believe it is possible for one person to be that sure of anything. No one person knows it all. I could be missing an important piece of the puzzle. I can believe that VII works. I cannot by myself know for certain.

It’s not just me on the issue of whether honestzzz posting should be permitted. That one is backed by our entire society, our entire culture, our entire history, our entire legal system. That’s why I feel so sure re that one. Re that one I am positive.

If I obtain a sufficient number of followers to achieve my goals, I will have what it takes to follow through. I know this from life experience. I won’t flinch. I won’t go sentimental. I won’t offer deference to my “betters.” I’m tough as nails when the circumstances are such that a person with my personality feels driven to be as tough as nails.

If I don’t obtain a sufficient number of followers, this will not happen. I will never feel that it is right to force it. I don’t believe that that can ever be the right thing to do and I will never be able to persuade myself that it is the right thing to do, no matter the circumstances. If things reach a point where our entire economic system is about to collapse and I still do not have a sufficient number of followers, so be it, that’s what was meant to happen. I don’t judge myself according to whether I achieve success in the eyes of the world (perhaps you have noticed!). I judge myself according to whether I have lived up to my internal standards. My internal standards compel me to send the e-mails. My internal standards forbid me from crossing lines that I believe should never be crossed. So there are many “options” that some others might consider that are not even remotely possible options in my mind.

Anyway, that’s where things stand from my perspective.

I am determined. And I am optimistic. But I am not certain. There are ways that things could play out that you guys would “win.” That sort of win would be a horrible loss for all of us, in my assessment. But I do not say that there is zero chance that we will all have to endure what comes with a win for you guys (and witches).

I am not entirely lacking in courage, though. I am indeed slow to act. Some interpret that as a lack of courage. My take is that it is better understood as a situational kind of courage. I need to be very sure before I become unbending.

“I Have Attended Two Years of the Financial Bloggers Conference, Letting All My Fellow Bloggers Know How Important It Is That We All Work to Bring the Campaign of Terror to a Full and Complete Stop. I Have a Funny Feeling That I Am Covered re This One.”

by

Set forth below is the text of a comment that I recently put to a discussion thread at this blog:

Rob,

Take a look at this:

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-are-internet-harassment-laws.htm

It looks like this describes what you are doing.

Here’s an article where I report on the Campaign of Terror of which Wade and I and many other good people have been victims:

http://www.passionsaving.com/internet-harassment.html

I have contacted my congressman, Sparky. I have contacted the Purcellville police. They have a file re this matter. I have contacted the FBI. I have contacted numerous lawyers. I have contacted a special division of the Virginia law enforcement authorities that deals with internet crimes. I have contacted the site owners who permitted abusive posting or criminal behavior at their sites. I have sent 9600 e-mails (it will be 9700 by the end of today) to my fellow citizens letting them know of the 10-year cover-up of the errors in the Old School retirement studies and how it has been carried out through the use of actions that constitute criminal financial fraud. I have written scores of guest blog entries on this matter. I have created five unique calculators that help people learn what they need to know to overcome the effects of this fraudulent enterprise. I have posted hundreds of thousands of comments at discussion boards and blogs. I have prayed. I have written and talked this over with a good number of the biggest names in the field, including Jack Bogle and Rob Arnott and Scott Burns and William Bernstein and Larry Swedroe. I have recorded 200 hour-long podcasts. I encouraged John Walter Russell to create an entire web site featuring his amazing research. I worked with Wade Pfau for 16 months telling him what he needed to know to prepare the most important research paper published in this field in the past 30 years. I write a daily blog devoted soley to discussion of these matters. I have 200 articles at my web site relating to these matters. I have attended two years of the Financial Bloggers Conference, letting all my fellow bloggers know how important it is that we all work to bring the Campaign of Terror to a full and complete stop by the close of today’s business. I talk about this to my friends at parties and Little League games and picnics and when I bring my boys to the pool. I have prepared a first draft of a book on the subject.

I have a funny feeling that I am covered re this one, my old friend.

Just one of those crazy hunches that I experience from time to time.

I naturally wish you all the best that this life has to offer a person.

Rob