Ghost of IgIoi wrote:
Idiot,
It is well known that I don't actually read the articles that I post here. I usually just look at the title. I claim no responsibility for the rest.
Igy
Oh that explains it. You should try reading what you post to avoid confusion.
Idiot,
That was not my post.
You on the other hand missed the most important point in the article:
"As of of March 12, 2016, the S&P 500 index at 2,022 appeared to me to be about 31% over-valued, as a point estimate, based on a long-term investment and based on reasonably conservative (but not pessimistic) assumptions."
And of coursed gleaned the most optimistic assumptions in the article to support your point of view.
Igy
Lemons,
You will soon be served a healthy slice of humble pie, with a glass of lemonade of course.
Igy
muy loca and agip,
The last sentence says it all for me:
"There is no room for everyone to profit from the same strategies and some or even most will have to lose eventually."
It is pretty obvious that institutional traders have piggy backed on each other trades to the point where there have been some significant bad trades. One only have to look to Valeant (VRX), think Sequoia Fund and Bill Ackman.
I will rely on facts, which clearly show declining fundamentals and valuation stretched to historic levels. Can this predict the actual top? No. Are investors picking up pennies in front of a steam roller? Yes.
Igy
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Idiot,
That was not my post.
You on the other hand missed the most important point in the article:
"As of of March 12, 2016, the S&P 500 index at 2,022 appeared to me to be about 31% over-valued, as a point estimate, based on a long-term investment and based on reasonably conservative (but not pessimistic) assumptions."
And of coursed gleaned the most optimistic assumptions in the article to support your point of view.
Igy
Well it was your post. And the author clearly predicted annual returns possibly above 5% over the next 10 yrs. I guess he's not too worried about the market being over valued.
Idiot,
As expected you twisted the conclusions to your own view. Here is what the author really said:
"My estimate in the two high-lighted rows is that the S&P 500 in ten years (the year 2026) will be at about 2164 (assumes 4% annual earnings growth from $86 and a final P/E ratio of 17). Buying the S&P 500 index when it is at about 2022 (the level when this article was written) should be expected (but certainly not guaranteed) to result in a forecast return of about 3.3% per year if held for the next 10 years. This is based on about 0.8% per year capital gains to get to 2,164 plus about 2.2% for dividends. The expected standard deviation around this expected 3.3% is also large so that the actual return over the next 10 years might be expected to fall within a range of about 1.3% to 5.3% per year with some chance of being outside that range. And that return includes dividends and is before trading costs and taxes. And in any given year, the return will range wildly and should definitely be expected to be negative in some years."
Igy
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Idiot,
As expected you twisted the conclusions to your own view. Here is what the author really said:
"My estimate in the two high-lighted rows is that the S&P 500 in ten years (the year 2026) will be at about 2164 (assumes 4% annual earnings growth from $86 and a final P/E ratio of 17). Buying the S&P 500 index when it is at about 2022 (the level when this article was written) should be expected (but certainly not guaranteed) to result in a forecast return of about 3.3% per year if held for the next 10 years. This is based on about 0.8% per year capital gains to get to 2,164 plus about 2.2% for dividends. The expected standard deviation around this expected 3.3% is also large so that the actual return over the next 10 years might be expected to fall within a range of about 1.3% to 5.3% per year with some chance of being outside that range. And that return includes dividends and is before trading costs and taxes. And in any given year, the return will range wildly and should definitely be expected to be negative in some years."
Igy
I didn't twist anything. And I know what the author said because I read it. Did you?
He already answered your question.
Ghost of IgIoi wrote:
Idiot,
It is well known that I don't actually read the articles that I post here. I usually just look at the title. I claim no responsibility for the rest.
Igy
econ:
mortgage apps - on the purchase side, +28% y/y, but m/m slowing
same store sales +0.9%. - same range
PMI mfgring dead flat near 50
ISM mfgring 51.3, so growing slightly. But looking ahead the new orders index is +55.8, which is expansionary.
construction spending took an uncharacteristic hit -2% m/m. but still up 4.5% y/y
Idiot: "And the author clearly predicted annual returns possibly above 5%."
Read more:
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=5369837&page=602#ixzz4AKzTCTAO
Igy: "And the author clearly predicted annual returns possibly below 1.3% per year."
And I know what the author said because I read it. Did you?
Igy
Try,
Keep up, not me.
Igy
Try to keep up wrote:
He already answered your question.
Ghost of IgIoi wrote:Idiot,
It is well known that I don't actually read the articles that I post here. I usually just look at the title. I claim no responsibility for the rest.
Igy
OH yeah
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Idiot: "And the author clearly predicted annual returns possibly above 5%."
Read more:
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=5369837&page=602#ixzz4AKzTCTAOIgy: "And the author clearly predicted annual returns possibly below 1.3% per year."
And I know what the author said because I read it. Did you?
Igy
You quoted the part I referenced whis is proof I read it. It also proves that what I wrote was correct. Next time read the article and not just the headline BEFORE you post the link.
Idiot,
Life is good, live it....and remain a dope.
Igy
Pot, meet kettle.
Idiot, meet Dope.
I'm not the one who posts articles without reading them first.
If the shoe fits...
Try,
I read everything I post. You and Idiot want to twist to fit your narrative.
If the shoe fits....
....and try to keep up by the way....
Igy
He twisted nothing. You can accuse him of cherry picking from the article, but that would be hypocritical given your penchant for doing the same.
Like I said: Pot, meet kettle.