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

So, what you are saying is that no one but you claims that Greaney made an error.  Again, why are YOU broke?  Why isn’t anyone willing to pay you a dime?

Everyone knows that he made an error. YOU know that. If you believed that his study contained a valuation adjustment, your next post would contain a link to the page in the study containing it.

The cover-up has been going on for 44 years. We should have talked this all through in 1981. After a 44-year cover-up, it is very hard. It only gets harder to wait longer. But it is very hard.

There’s a movie called “The Insider” about a man who knew that the tobacco industry was lying in testimony to Congress about research that showed that smoking causes cancer. All of the same tactics that have been used to suppress what I say and what all the people who have posted in support of me say were used to keep the public in the dark about the dangers of smoking. Do you think It would have been better if that cover-up were still going on? I do not. I think we needed to bring it to an end. I think we need to bring the Buy-and-Hold cover-up to an end as well.

The longer it continues, the worse it is for each and every one of us.

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:

Yes, this is the academic researcher that made a recent statement that market timing with CAPE failed based on the most recent data.

It is.

If the Buy-and-Holders were confident in their strategy, they would want to find out what he would say in an environment in which there were no intimidation tactics being practiced.

And they would want to find out the same re everyone else who works in this field.

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 do read ALL the research.  That is something you don’t do. The research shows that buy and hold has never failed over ANY 30 year period.  I have never seen any research showing successful outcomes with VII.  Even Wade Pfau gave a recent update explaining the poor performance of market timing ever since the Shiller work.

Wade told a very, very, very different story before he was threatened. If you wanted to benefit from his intelligence, you would not want him to be intimidated in any way. You would want him to present his views exactly as he believes them. You would want that of everyone who comments on these matters.

After he was threatened, Wade advanced the idea that there was some sort of mystical event that changed the way that the stock market operates from how it had always operated in the past. There is no way to disprove such a claim. He never identified what the mystical event was. So it is not possible for anyone who is skeptical about explanations rooted in mysticism to challenge it. You either believe in mystical explanations or you don’t and that’s that.

I think that we should permit those who want to advance mystical explanations to do so and also permit those who want to offer research-based understandings to do so. My personal belief is that Wade would never have turned to the mystical side if he had not been threatened. I cannot prove that. I cannot see into his mind. But I was interacting with him on a regular basis when he was full of enthusiasm about research-based strategies (Valuation-Informed Indexing), when he was telling me that he couldn’t sleep at night because he was so excited about the ways in which the research we were working on together could enhance millions of human lives. That’s the real Wade Pfau for me, the pre-threatened version of Wade Pfau.

Rob

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

Greaney has nothing to do with what I said. Why change the conversation. It just shows you are trying to distract people.

Wade Pfau admits now that market timing failed, so you can’t even spin that anymore.

Wade never should have been threatened. If Buy-and-Hold were a real thing, every Buy-and-Holder would speak up in opposition to the intimidation tactics that you Goons have employed to suppress discussion of the last 42 years of peer-reviewed research.

But say that Wade had flipped of his own volition. If that were so, the fact that there was a time when he believed that “Yes, Virginia, Valuation-Informed Indexing works!” would mean that honest posting re the research should be permitted. Wade holds a Ph.D. in Economics from Princeton. If some with that background find merit in market timing even for a brief time-period, it is something that we should be permitted to discuss at every site. People should be able to hear both sides and make up their own minds.

Greaney’s failure to correct his retirement study for 21 years is very relevant. It’s been 21 years. There are people who used that study to plan their retirement. What does it say about Buy-and-Hold that the study has not been corrected to this day?

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:

“He never retracted that paper”

He would if anyone ever asked him about it. In fact he’d be mortified, because its conclusion was disastrously wrong. At least he defined his market timing scheme (unlike you) and it would have had the investor in 0% stocks every year except one, going back over 30 years. Anyone following that scheme would have been irreparably crushed by buy-and-hold. Like you were.

As with all market timing schemes, it fell apart almost to the day it got published.

Why don’t you ask him for a follow-up? He was “extremely grateful” to you, so he owes you that much.

I don’t believe that Wade would retract the paper. I think he is very, very proud of it. It could be that he would like to keep quiet about it until the days following the next Buy-and-Hold Crisis, when I believe that every site on the internet will be opened to honest posting. I believe that Wade and I will be working together again in those days. So we will do a follow-up then.

The paper shows what the paper shows. It doesn’t make any claims about when the next Buy-and-Hold Crisis is going to take place. It shows that Valuation-Informed Indexing has been far superior to Buy-and-Hold for the entire history of the U.S. market. Do I believe that the stock market may continue to perform in the future somwhat as it has always performed in the past? I do indeed. But that’s opinion. That’s not in the paper. The paper presents the historical return data showing that Valuation-Informed Indexing has always far outperformed Buy-and-Hold. The historical record is not opinion. The historical record is fact.

I believe that every investor on the planet needs to see and discuss that paper before investing one dime in stocks. I believe that it is the most important research done in this field since the 1980s. I believe that when all is said and done Wade may be awarded a Nobel prize for the work he did on that paper. I view it as the most important accomplishment of my life. No apologies whatsoever.

It will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

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:

Wade Pfau has never recommended market timing to anyone.  Read his books and website.  You are broke and divorced.  Learn from it.

The entire paper, which has Wade’s name on it, makes the case for market timing. He never retracted that paper, even when he was threatened.

In contrast, there is not one research paper showing that long-term timing does not work. Wade devoted 16 months of his life to trying to find one and never came up with anything. He said that he was amazed by this, he kept thinking that he must have been making some mistake. But that was the reality.

100 percent of the evidence supports market timing. 0 percent supports Buy-and-Hold (price indifference). Hence, all of the crazy behavior on the part of the Buy-and-Holders. We need to open every discussion board and blog to honest posting.

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:

Wade’s new book is out.  Just like previous books, he never talks about you, never mentions Greaney and he does not recommend any timing schemes (including VII).  Wade is not alone.  None of the experts agree with you.  I guess in your world, they are all wrong/corrupt and you stand alone as the only person that is right/ethical.  Do I have that right?

Every expert both agrees with me and disagrees with me at the same time. I am not aware of one expert who has said that he believes that Greaney included a valuation adjustment in the retirement study posted at his web site. Even Evidence-Based Investing, who is one of the generals in Greaney’s army of internet goons, acknowledged not too long ago that he does not believe that the Greaney study contains a valuation adjustment. I think it would be fair to say that, when you’ve lost Evidence….

That said, Evidence did not say that he believes that the Greaney study should be immediately corrected and none of the other experts say that either. Wade said it for a time and contacted the authors of the Trinity study seeking a correction. But, when his career was threatened, he pulled back. So we have universal acknowledgment that the study is in error and only one person (me!) regularly and consistently urging correction of the study. That’s the state of play in the year 2021. For the first time in history, we know how stock investing works. But there has been a 40-year cover-up of what we have learned. So we are all very, very, very afraid to talk about what we now know. It would make the Buy-and-Holders look bad for people to learn about this massive cover-up.

The only thing that I could see that would break the logjam is the next price crash. In the event that stocks continue to perform in the future as they always have in the past, we will be seeing millions of failed retirements, hundreds of thousands of business failures, millions of people being thrown out of their jobs and a dramatic increase in political frictions. I believe that this new Buy-and-Hold Crisis will provide the push we need to get a number of people (including Wade) speaking out. It’s all downhill sledding from there. It will be a horrible event to live through. It could bring on the Second Great Depression. But if we make it in one piece to the other side, we will all be able to work together to bury the Get Rich Quick/Buy-and-Hold stuff 30 feet in the ground, where it can do no further harm to humans and other living things.

Please make me down as being 100 percent in agreement with Evidence that the Greaney study is in error but 100 percent in disagreement with Evidence that the error does not need to be promptly corrected. I believe that the error should have been corrected within 24 hours of the moment at which Greaney became aware of it (the morning of May 13, 2002).

My best wishes to you and yours.

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:

Nothing needed correcting, as Wade Pfau pointed out.

Wade pointed out (after being threatened by you Goons) that Greaney had advanced a comment on the first day of the discussions saying that anyone who cared to was free to take a withdrawal rate of less than 4 percent. Of course they were. That was never in question.

What we need is to permit all community members to post their honest views. When we all feel free to post our honest views, those of us who believe that Shiller’s Nobel-prize-winning research is legitimate research will be saying that. Whenever a Buy-and-Holder says that the safe withdrawal rate is always 4 percent, we will be explaining why that is not so. That way, the percentage of the population following Valuation-Informed Indexing will increase over time and we will never again see the sort of CAPE value that applies today.

We all need to learn about the last 40 years of peer-reviewed research and to incorporate the lessons of that wonderful body of research into our understanding of how stock investing works. The intimidation tactics of the Buy-and-Holders have been holding us back for a long time.. We need to bring the intimidation tactics to a full and complete stop by the close of business today and begin enjoying the benefits of an amazing learning experience.

That is my sincere take re these terribly important matters, in any event.

My best and warmest wishes to you and yours.

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:

Wade Pfau’s research concluded that you did not understand the Greaney issue. Wade Pfau’s research into your “missing step” concluded that you would not get the $500 million. Wade Pfau’s research concluded that you caused him considerable harm.

Because he was threatened.

Wade spent 16 months researching the merits of Valuation-Informed Indexing and loving every minute of it and expressing his amazement that hundreds of researchers had not looked into it long before he came along and bafflement that anyone could ever have concluded that Buy-and-Hold was superior and excitement about how he would be able to help millions to live better lives as our research became known throughout the investment community. Then you threatened to destroy his career if he kept at it. And he told me that he was scared of you and wrote a few words to make you happy disowning his wonderful work. Gee, I wonder what was going on there.

Extortion is a crime, Anonymous. It is a felony. This particular act of extortion did harm to millions of people. I think it would be fair to say that you will be spending time in a prison cell in the days following the next price crash. Not this boy, you know? I don’t want to spend time in a prison cell and I do not want to see people who used to be my friends doing so either. So I have done everything in my power for 18 years now to persuade you to walk a different path and to persuade others to try to persuade you to walk a different path. When you discover that the only way that you can defend your favorite investing strategy is to engage in criminal acts, it is time to go looking for a new favorite investing strategy.

My sincere take.

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:

Not sure if you have seen this

Wade Pfau: The 4% Rule Is No Longer Safe

Episode Summary
The noted retirement researcher discusses how pre-retirees and retirees can adjust their plans in times of market stress.

https://the-long-view.simplecast.com/episodes/wade-pfau-9Z7_8m/transcript

Thanks much for providing that link, Evidence.

Wade makes about 20 points in that article that merit discussion. I will write a column for Value Walk looking at some of them.

I am certainly glad that Wade is saying that the 4 percent rule doesn’t work. I am proud to be able to say that he learned that from me. I don’t get the sense that our views today on these issues are precisely the same. But so what, you know? No two people have precisely the same views on all issues. I did something of great importance by launching The Great Safe Withdrawal Rate Debate and we are all continuing to learn stuff as a result 18 years later. We should be encouraging everyone to get involved. We need to examine these issues from all sides.

Part of the discussion should be — Why has it taken so long to get clear statements out before the public as to the errors in those studies? A lot of people planned retirements using those obviously flawed studies. It should’t take 18 years for stuff like this to happen. There should be ethical standards in this field. In a field with ethical standards, you would never see death threats or demands for unjustified board bannings or thousands of acts of defamation or threats to get academic reseachers fired from their jobs, none of the ugly Goon stuff. I mean, come on. We all need to know how stock investing works. So we all should be doing everything we can to help each other learn as much as possible.

The most significant idea that he puts forward in the article is the idea that Valuation-Informed Indexing worked from 1870 until 1996 and then stopped working. I don’t buy it. This is certainly the longest period of time that we have gone with prices remaining this high. That’s an important fact. People need to know that. So I don’t see that as a crazy position. But you have to look at more than what has worked for a certain number of years. You have to ask — WHY?

If the market were efficient, as the Buy-and-Holders say, market timing would never work. But it worked for nearly 130 years. Why? I think it is because gains that are the product of a CAPE level higher than 16 are rooted in irrational exuberance, not in economic realities. If that’s so, that’s huge. That’s something we need to figure out. Not next week or next month or next year. Now . Immediately. Last week. 18 years ago. 39 years ago. Like that.

So why hasn’t VII been working for the past 24 years? I think the crash has just been delayed. I have written in some depth on what may be going on on earlier occasions. It may be something as simple as the promotion of Buy-and-Hold. Investors feel safe not engaging in market timing today because they believe the claims that there is research backing up the Buy-and-Hold concept that timing is not required. Which is false, as Wade well knows. But millions of people believe it. So they don’t sell as soon as they would have in earlier days and the crash is delayed. But they will still sell eventually. And the loss of consumer buying power that will result when the CAPE drops dramatically could put us in a Second Great Depression. So this is something that we need to have many smart people examining in great depth.

I see the publication of the article as a nice step forward. I still believe in Valuation-Informed Indexing. But I have never said that I am God, I have never said that I have perfect knowledge. At least Wade’s criticism of the concept makes sense. And it wouldn’t surprise me even a tiny bit to see him flip back after the next price crash, which I still believe is coming (although I cannot say precisely when).

Anyway, I am certainly grateful for the link.

Wade Pfau Fan (As Always!) Rob