Flagpole wrote:
I have not made any short-term predictions for 2011 due to very murky waters...until today...so for entertainment purposes only, here's the prediction:
With 100+ posts in this thread, it's quite clear that people have been entertained, so it looks like yet another win for flagpole. :)
long sox wrote:
With 100+ posts in this thread, it's quite clear that people have been entertained, so it looks like yet another win for flagpole. :)
And yet another loss for the intelligence of the universe.
I feel if Dow comfortably sits in 13000 area that the economy will turn around and jobs will rain out of the sky. This post is replying to a slightly old post, but my idea still remains the same. The Dow almost made it to a double of its march 2009 low (129ish)going into debt ceiling debate. not entirely a 100% increase there. Investors are flacky when it comes to number barriers. It never made it there before aug. or way back at beginning of the year. Congress went on TV to many times and scared way to many investors going into debt ceiling deadline. That crash was caused by congress. If you say well why didn't it go up right after Obama signed the bill? The answer is the market crashed so hard gold went up and attracted to many investors away from stock.12800 down to like 10600 in beginning of aug. The crash was why gold went up to an inflated price after aug debates ended. We again had another crash going into super congress deadline. almost 1000 points that time only black friday turned that around. look both spots up on Dow 2 weeks before aug 2 and nov 23. I said it then before they both happened. August was worse than nov for 3 reasons. First one investors predicted the crash ahead of time, so big shots didn't catch other investors off guard. Secondly congress already knew they were treading on thin water so they didn't come out and bash each other that time. Last thing was black friday exceeded expectations. Congress needs to shut the F up and just say nothing until election time when they all get kicked out.The Dow needs to crash to barriers 12900 and 13000. I feel 12900 won't be hard this time around. Mark my word first time Dow goes through 13000 we will have another correction that will send it back under 13000. the second time it moves through 13000 we will rain jobs. Why? elite investors will change there strategy, because the markets will be to close to pre George Bush market crash levels. They will invest in longer term investments and the markets will stabilize.
understood. however, i find it funny at the end you say investors will be more confident in the market (more or less) once we hit 13,000. funny thing is that they had already missed a 2000 point run up. humans are a funny bunch.
i only invest during crashes, and im doing quite well.
bigsshot wrote:
understood. however, i find it funny at the end you say investors will be more confident in the market (more or less) once we hit 13,000. funny thing is that they had already missed a 2000 point run up. humans are a funny bunch.
i only invest during crashes, and im doing quite well.
ach, I remember a time when there wasn't a crash for many years. Now we get one every year, almost.
Thats because "buy and hold" is dead and we now have a market that reacts to the daily news. Get used to it.
How did that prediction thing work out for you, Flagpole?
Considering his methods of accounting for gains was completely debunked on another thread (which he subsequently deleted), does it really matter?
At close on 12/30 it was 12217.56. You were off by a lot. Can you please quit posting these. Your historical average is that you don't know what you're talking about. I will pass on having you as my financial advisor. You may be an encyclopedia (and a helpful one at that) but you really just don't forecast well.
Steve Martin wrote:
How did that prediction thing work out for you, Flagpole?
Can't speak for FP (I think he already answered the question), but it worked out okay for me. :-)
Not in this thread. He has been absent since the 17th.Pay attention wrote:
Steve Martin wrote:How did that prediction thing work out for you, Flagpole?
Can't speak for FP (I think he already answered the question), but it worked out okay for me. :-)
trolling myself wrote:
At close on 12/30 it was 12217.56. You were off by a lot. Can you please quit posting these. Your historical average is that you don't know what you're talking about. I will pass on having you as my financial advisor. You may be an encyclopedia (and a helpful one at that) but you really just don't forecast well.
1) Up over 1000 points from when I made the prediction and off by just 700+. Considering the Dow could have gone DOWN as many people also said, not that bad of a prediction. Also, considering it has continued to go UP after the new year, that just goes to the point that it was undervalued when I made that call. Was I WRONG? Yep. Was I SUPER wrong? Nope.
2) Dude, sorry but I DO know what I'm talking about. I've always said that NO ONE can make accurate short-term calls, including ME and that I do so on occasion only for fun. I did not change my investment strategy based on how I thought the market would go short term.
3) You have dismissed me as your financial adviser because you don't believe I forecast well...well then, you don't do enough research about what it is I provide as a financial adviser, because forecasting is not part of it at all. If you go with historical averages, 73% of all years are UP years...there is no reason to believe that will drastically change going forward. My advice is clear and easy to follow: emergency fund of 3-6 months of expenses, debt free but for the house, 15% (OR MORE) goes into retirement accounts made up of mutual funds that are mainly in stocks (more bonds are you get closer to retirement), reinvest the dividends, buy a house that is no more than 25% of your take home pay and then pay it off early. Don't retire until you are 100% debt free. Do what I suggest and you'll have a great retirement, won't ever put yourself in a position to lose your shirt, won't spend all that much time dealing with your investments, and will never be worried about short-term drops in the market.
Look, your financial advise is pretty good, but you missed it here. Trying to spin it is what you condemn Fox News for, so why are you doing the same? If it is wrong for them, it is wrong for you.
Pay attention wrote:
Thats because "buy and hold" is dead and we now have a market that reacts to the daily news. Get used to it.
buy and hold has been great over the past 10 years...unless you own just the SP 500 or Dow. Virtually any class of stocks other than huge US companies has been pretty good. small caps, mid caps, real estate, emerging markets, commodities, bonds of course.
Markets have always reacted to daily news - that is not new. What is new is that there is genuine fear that the whole house of cards could fall down. That fear is very rare, except among the goldbugs.
In other words, the problem is black swan events, and that is what is causing the big 20% sell offs. Buy and hold is fine - you just have to have a steelier backbone that usual.
When I wrote "buy and hold is dead" I meant as a popular investment strategy in current times. It is still a driving philosophy for my own investment strategy, but it's not nearly as popular with the masses as it once was. In the era of the day trader, what's in the news becomes the primary driving force behind market movement - much more do than in the "buy and hold" days.
Flagpole claiming to beat the Dow 22 of 23yrs. When some uncomfortable questions were posed, the thread was deleted.
Do not listen to him re: his returns. If he has had the returns he claims (+10%/yr, maxed IRA and 401k contributions etc.) he would have $2mm.
Derek Smalls wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/84xy4zyFlagpole claiming to beat the Dow 22 of 23yrs. When some uncomfortable questions were posed, the thread was deleted.
Do not listen to him re: his returns. If he has had the returns he claims (+10%/yr, maxed IRA and 401k contributions etc.) he would have $2mm.
That thread deletion was absolutely hilarious. Of course it is only a matter of minutes before your post and mine will be deleted here as well.
One correction - He actually claimed to have beaten the Dow 23 out of 23 years. Hilarious.
Is $2 million a lot of money to you? You just spelled it out brother...over time, if you invest, even people with modest incomes can end up wealthy by retirement time. Maxing out a 401k AND an IRA though is tough to do with just one income. I'm not doing that...now when my wife goes back to work full-time some day (maybe she won't), we could.You can decide what you want, but I have averaged over 10% return a year since 1989, and the first 7 years of my marriage, my wife and I invested HALF of our income (granted our income then was a LOT less than it is now).You should NOT be amazed by this. Mutual fund returns since inception have been around 11%...I've done WORSE than the average (mainly because I now have some bonds in there too).BUT, let's take your assertion and see what 10% since 1989 could bring IF you invested $20,000 year year (about what ONE 401k max and ONE IRA max would be).$20,000 a year since 1989 earning 10% annually would today be $1.57 million, so not the $2 million you said.Also, if you're wanting to pin my amount down, you can't use that, because in 1989 half of our income didn't equal $20,000, and I've never said I MAXED everything anyway. I always say do 15%. I currently do about 20%, but 20% of my income today is NOT $20,000, AND there were years in there when we had to drop to 5%.
Derek Smalls wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/84xy4zyFlagpole claiming to beat the Dow 22 of 23yrs. When some uncomfortable questions were posed, the thread was deleted.
Do not listen to him re: his returns. If he has had the returns he claims (+10%/yr, maxed IRA and 401k contributions etc.) he would have $2mm.
You can do it too brother. If you actually read that thread, you'd know that I include reinvested dividends in my calculations. The fact that so many of you can't fathom this makes me believe you don't invest at all.Here's how you are GUARANTEED to beat the Dow every year using my calculations...buy the Dow...just the Dow. Reinvest the dividends from it and you win...every time.So far I'm beating the Dow in 2012 too. I'm up 3.3% YTD. No dividends yet, so that's just flat out luck.
U Got That (almost) Right wrote:
Derek Smalls wrote:http://tinyurl.com/84xy4zyFlagpole claiming to beat the Dow 22 of 23yrs. When some uncomfortable questions were posed, the thread was deleted.
Do not listen to him re: his returns. If he has had the returns he claims (+10%/yr, maxed IRA and 401k contributions etc.) he would have $2mm.
That thread deletion was absolutely hilarious. Of course it is only a matter of minutes before your post and mine will be deleted here as well.
One correction - He actually claimed to have beaten the Dow 23 out of 23 years. Hilarious.
You cannot, "buy the Dow". It is a price weighted index. If there are 2 stocks in the dow, A $90, B $10, then A =90%, B = %10. And this changes every day. So beating it is basically beating a few stocks in the index e.g. 2011 you beat the dow because you owned IBM and MCD. No other way.
If we look at an investable index like the S&P500, it has returned 6% since 1988. If we assume 2% dividends on average, then we're at 8%. So Flagpole is saying that with mutual funds he is beating the most transparent benchmark there is, every year. Most mutual fund managers have as much if not more knowledge than Flagpole, and yet they cannot beat their benchmarks. And yet he can, buy holding these exact same mutual funds.
And this is with a 13% allocation to fixed income, which is down this year so his returns on his equity would be more like +4%.
The actual returns Flagpole suggest are just not possible given his strategy. His returns are lower and he is putting in a lot more money than he may be aware of. And/or he is not counting matching contributions in his 401k. Something is not kosher.