Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Purple Martin wrote:
I don't know if it's perfectly alright, but you've been doing it (60% drop on the horizon) for years.
No, 50% previously, 67% today.
How did that 50% call for the past 3 years pan out?
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Purple Martin wrote:
I don't know if it's perfectly alright, but you've been doing it (60% drop on the horizon) for years.
No, 50% previously, 67% today.
How did that 50% call for the past 3 years pan out?
When's the last time the Dow went up 54% in five months?
It dropped that amount from 10/9/07 to 3/9/08.
Oh. By the way. The S&P 500 dropped 57% in that same period.
Purple Martin wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
No, 50% previously, 67% today.
How did that 50% call for the past 3 years pan out?
Really won’t matter when your equity positions are cut -67%.
It’s mattered for those invested for the last 3 years.
Making money wrote:
It’s mattered for those invested for the last 3 years.
Those returns are not durable. Sorry for that revelation.
Igloi, you are your own worst detractor.
Basing the numbers on S&P prices from exactly three years ago today until today, an investor would have made more than half of what you portend they may suffer in a downturn. Who wouldn't choose the real 50% actual gains, in hand, against the risk of a possilbe downturn that would wipe out that amount plus an equivalent amount?
No brainer. Anyone that was in the market for the last 3 years won.
Remember, during a downturn, one can always sell and take their profits. That's the luxury achieved by anyone that's been long for the last 3 years.
Investments are not static.
seattle prattle wrote:
Igloi, you are your own worst detractor.
Basing the numbers on S&P prices from exactly three years ago today until today, an investor would have made more than half of what you portend they may suffer in a downturn. Who wouldn't choose the real 50% actual gains, in hand, against the risk of a possilbe downturn that would wipe out that amount plus an equivalent amount?
No brainer. Anyone that was in the market for the last 3 years won.
Remember, during a downturn, one can always sell and take their profits. That's the luxury achieved by anyone that's been long for the last 3 years.
Investments are not static.
Seattle,
First point I have never said be out of the market three years ago or today. Second point, down 67% is about 900 S&P 500. I doubt you or most who post here will have faired well at that S&P 500 regardless of any booked profits. Lastly, the only debateable point is what is the downside risk, and is 900 S&P 500 too extreme. I don’t believe it is.
Igy
If it were to drop that much, i would bet that there would be a drastic rebound. Too many would see it for what it is - a once in a lifetime buying opportunity,
Seattle,
That once in a lifetime opportunity would wipe out two decades of buy and hold S&P 500 returns. You may want to temper your views on any quick rebound with a current Federal Reserve balance sheet of $4.4 Trillion and Fed Funds at 1.0-1.25%. What were those figures at the last downrurn?
Igy
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Making money wrote:
It’s mattered for those invested for the last 3 years.
Those returns are not durable. Sorry for that revelation.
They are for those who sell at a profit.
Making money wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Those returns are not durable. Sorry for that revelation.
They are for those who sell at a profit.
which brings me to the essential point. A directional prediction (i.e.: 67% downturn) is not much of a prediction unless you say when it is to occur. If you can't approximate the timing, it can do as much harm as good. And the last 3 years are a case in point.
seattle prattle wrote:
Making money wrote:
They are for those who sell at a profit.
which brings me to the essential point. A directional prediction (i.e.: 67% downturn) is not much of a prediction unless you say when it is to occur. If you can't approximate the timing, it can do as much harm as good. And the last 3 years are a case in point.
That’s exactly what we’ve been telling Igy this whole time. It’s just hot air.
Go Pats!
seattle prattle wrote:
Making money wrote:
They are for those who sell at a profit.
which brings me to the essential point. A directional prediction (i.e.: 67% downturn) is not much of a prediction unless you say when it is to occur. If you can't approximate the timing, it can do as much harm as good. And the last 3 years are a case in point.
Seattle,
And I will say what I said before, the timing is less important. The operative point is valuation. At even higher valuation prospective return drops lower. You and others believe there is some buffer in a rise market. Historically that is not true.
Igy
Stanley Morgan wrote:
seattle prattle wrote:
which brings me to the essential point. A directional prediction (i.e.: 67% downturn) is not much of a prediction unless you say when it is to occur. If you can't approximate the timing, it can do as much harm as good. And the last 3 years are a case in point.
That’s exactly what we’ve been telling Igy this whole time. It’s just hot air.
Go Pats!
That would be no different than your failure to predict the low last month. My point then and now is one of valuation, that is what I have been telling you the whole time.
It is delated air from Brady’s footballs. You can blame it on the ball boy if you wish.
Go Fats!
[quote]seattle prattle wrote:
Igloi, you are your own worst detractor.
Basing the numbers on S&P prices from exactly three years ago today until today, an investor would have made more than half of what you portend they may suffer in a downturn. Who wouldn't choose the real 50% actual gains, in hand, against the risk of a possilbe downturn that would wipe out that amount plus an equivalent amount?
If you lose 57% as the market did in five month in 08-09, it needs to then go up 114% to get back to even.
Math matters wrote:
If you lose 57% as the market did in five month in 08-09, it needs to then go up 114% to get back to even.
1. Your math is wrong.
2. It did get back to even and then some.
Purple Martin wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
No, 50% previously, 67% today.
How did that 50% call for the past 3 years pan out?
You know how the market performed the past three years.
That has no value.
It's the next years that matter
Math Mann wrote:
Math matters wrote:
If you lose 57% as the market did in five month in 08-09, it needs to then go up 114% to get back to even.
1. Your math is wrong.
2. It did get back to even and then some.
The math is wrong? Care to explain?
Your hindsight is great.
ghost of twenty nine wrote:
Not too fast wrote:
History says otherwise.
Not so fast, sonny.
In times of extreme valuations, history doesn't say otherwise.
Who said anything about "times of extreme valuations?”
Answer: no one.
Yowsah wrote:
Math Mann wrote:
1. Your math is wrong.
2. It did get back to even and then some.
The math is wrong? Care to explain?
Your hindsight is great.
Your math skills are atrocious, Igy. This is middle school math.
57/43 = 1.33
Now care to explain how you got your answer? I’m guessing you'll opt to deflect, as usual.