nah wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Looking forward to a run with my mates. Plan to shampoo some carpets for the wife while watching the Milrose Games.
Igy
Always a smart move by you. Move on to something unrelated to the topic, and no one has an interest in.
Learn to use tools rather than spending your weekends watching sports ball.
Sally Vix wrote:
seattle prattle wrote:
Me, too. If you are talking about being up on AMZN. Overall I am up 33% on investment. Igy, do you really think it is wise to focus on the day to day swings of these long term winners? Industry leader with good earnings, disruptive technologies, products in the pipeline. Maybe you just have the wrong approach?
Just trying to help.
His investment philosophy (if you can call it that) is to ignore the long-term incredible success of the stock market and focus on when CDs (which have terrible returns 95% of the time) have one good year out of 30. It is a laughable strategy but one he adheres to and is proud of.
A different view than what is promoted by the financial products industry which makes more sense to me, especially a lofty valuations.
https://paulclaireaux.com/why-its-okay-to-miss-the-best-days/So, some investment fund marketing folk (and some advisers) will develop a story based on misleading information.
Oh, the irony!
Irony Mann wrote:
So, some investment fund marketing folk (and some advisers) will develop a story based on misleading information.
Oh, the irony!
Yes, “Mr. Buy and Hold.”
I find it interesting that you think my post was about you.
I find it interesting that you always play the same games. How many years has this gone on now?
4U wrote:
I find it interesting that you think my post was about you.
I know your link was aimed at Irony Mann, but it makes complete sense that Igy thought it was about him.
seattle prattle wrote:
Big Dog Investments wrote:
Mine is in the black.
Me, too. If you are talking about being up on AMZN. Overall I am up 33% on investment. Igy, do you really think it is wise to focus on the day to day swings of these long term winners? Industry leader with good earnings, disruptive technologies, products in the pipeline. Maybe you just have the wrong approach?
Just trying to help.
AMZN was over $2000 a share back in October. Not only did they lower guidance for next quarter, they're down to like $1500 in just the span of about 4 months. An industry leader with good earnings, disruptive technologies, products in the pipeline is down 25% and lowering guidance. Doesn't seem very bullish to me
Racket wrote:
seattle prattle wrote:
Me, too. If you are talking about being up on AMZN. Overall I am up 33% on investment. Igy, do you really think it is wise to focus on the day to day swings of these long term winners? Industry leader with good earnings, disruptive technologies, products in the pipeline. Maybe you just have the wrong approach?
Just trying to help.
AMZN was over $2000 a share back in October. Not only did they lower guidance for next quarter, they're down to like $1500 in just the span of about 4 months. An industry leader with good earnings, disruptive technologies, products in the pipeline is down 25% and lowering guidance. Doesn't seem very bullish to me
Up 22% since Christmas.
KeIIy wrote:
Racket wrote:
AMZN was over $2000 a share back in October. Not only did they lower guidance for next quarter, they're down to like $1500 in just the span of about 4 months. An industry leader with good earnings, disruptive technologies, products in the pipeline is down 25% and lowering guidance. Doesn't seem very bullish to me
Up 22% since Christmas.
Great, so if you literally bought at close on Christmas Eve then you're doing well for yourself. I'm just going by AMZN's own guidance here
Investors piled in the Tech stocks in summer of 2000 right before the market took another leg down.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Investors piled in the Tech stocks in summer of 2000 right before the market took another leg down.
Ghost, hope you had a nice weekend. But, again you are cherry-picking 2000 again. Oh! It just happens to be the year immediately preceding the worst three-year run of stocks in the last 30 years. 2003 the S & P had a REAL rate of return (even accounting for inflation) of over 26%. Think about that ... 26% even taking into account inflation. But your baseline is ALWAYS the year 2000. Simply because those three years are terrible. Look at the far right column beginning in 2003 and you can see how fabulously the market has done since with the lone bad year being 2008. And these are not simply returns but INFLATION-ADJUSTED returns. And does not even account for dividends which would be another 1% each year.
Sally,
Had a good weekend thanks.
I use 2000 because that was the first of three Fed induced bubbles. The current one popped on 9/20/2018. Will see where we go, but in my view it won’t be pretty.
Igy
Sally Vix wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Investors piled in the Tech stocks in summer of 2000 right before the market took another leg down.
Ghost, hope you had a nice weekend. But, again you are cherry-picking 2000 again. Oh! It just happens to be the year immediately preceding the worst three-year run of stocks in the last 30 years. 2003 the S & P had a REAL rate of return (even accounting for inflation) of over 26%. Think about that ... 26% even taking into account inflation. But your baseline is ALWAYS the year 2000. Simply because those three years are terrible. Look at the far right column beginning in 2003 and you can see how fabulously the market has done since with the lone bad year being 2008. And these are not simply returns but INFLATION-ADJUSTED returns. And does not even account for dividends which would be another 1% each year.
What's your preferred time span then, 1910 to present? I'm not trying to defend Igy here but it's amazing how many people are like "buy and hold, buy and hold!" As the saying goes, it works, till it doesn't. Modern monetary policy is constantly shifting with new economic theories.
Exhibit A : go look at the Nikkei 225. The Bank of Japan is the #1 creator/redeemer of almost all of the ETFs traded on the Nikkei and it's not even a close race. They're a majority or significant shareholder of like 90% of companies listed!
Oh! But Japan has an aging crisis, and strict immigration laws that make it hard for cheap labor, right? Kinda sounds like what the US might be facing soon if you ask me.
Igy, quit claiming buy and hold is bad just because it hasn't worked well for a selected time frame and explain why buy and hold won't work for the immediate future.
Everyone else, quit saying buy and hold is good because it has worked well for a selected time frame and explain why it's still a good idea for investors going forward.
Racket wrote:
I wonder where agip has been. Probably off on his new yacht considering we just had the best January practically ever
I'm back, tanned and rested.
My clients have the yachts. I need to charge more.
What a freaking few months.
Hope all are well.
Racket,
I think buy and hold is fine for a 30 year old with $20,000, but not so for a 60 year old with $200,000. Valuations do matter and your equity returns from here will be poor from a historical perspective. The other point I make is going from the 3/2000 top to the 9/2018 peak equity returns are well below their historical average. My view is this is a better reflection of the future than using 130 year historical return.
This is just a market view and not a religious crusade.
Igy
Racket wrote:
Sally Vix wrote:
Ghost, hope you had a nice weekend. But, again you are cherry-picking 2000 again. Oh! It just happens to be the year immediately preceding the worst three-year run of stocks in the last 30 years. 2003 the S & P had a REAL rate of return (even accounting for inflation) of over 26%. Think about that ... 26% even taking into account inflation. But your baseline is ALWAYS the year 2000. Simply because those three years are terrible. Look at the far right column beginning in 2003 and you can see how fabulously the market has done since with the lone bad year being 2008. And these are not simply returns but INFLATION-ADJUSTED returns. And does not even account for dividends which would be another 1% each year.
What's your preferred time span then, 1910 to present? I'm not trying to defend Igy here but it's amazing how many people are like "buy and hold, buy and hold!" As the saying goes, it works, till it doesn't. Modern monetary policy is constantly shifting with new economic theories.
Exhibit A : go look at the Nikkei 225. The Bank of Japan is the #1 creator/redeemer of almost all of the ETFs traded on the Nikkei and it's not even a close race. They're a majority or significant shareholder of like 90% of companies listed!
Oh! But Japan has an aging crisis, and strict immigration laws that make it hard for cheap labor, right? Kinda sounds like what the US might be facing soon if you ask me.
Igy, quit claiming buy and hold is bad just because it hasn't worked well for a selected time frame and explain why buy and hold won't work for the immediate future.
Everyone else, quit saying buy and hold is good because it has worked well for a selected time frame and explain why it's still a good idea for investors going forward.
It doesn't really matter the time frame. The market does great overall over pretty much any span of time. Here are some examples (dividends reinvested):
1920 to current - 10.02%
1950 to current - 11.2%
1970 to current - 11%
1990 to current - 10.6%
I even included Ghost's off-repeated 2000 year which includes 2000, 2001 and 2002 which is like the worst 3-year span ever. Even including his beloved 2000 - the market returned 7% to current.
2009 to current - 14%
2010 to current - 13%
You can see for yourself ( the market has done great no matter the time frame - especially against other investments and double especially against CDs)!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14wIIKVokX8