Maserati wrote:
agip wrote:
markets limping along at all time highs
Not when priced in, for instance, gold.
oh maser. *sigh*
your posts always make me think of that old saying 'in the long run we're all dead'
I don't know exactly why I think that about your posts but there it is.
Yes, I can have that effect—until you realize that I am neither ambivalent nor fatalistic, and am actually more active than you likely are. Not to mention that I have had a great year on only a handful of transactions.
I am definitely not excited by goings-on, however. I have no exuberance for these markets, no love—only a dispassionate detachment, even a kind of sullen resignation.
It’s a weird feeling agip, I must admit. Maybe I’m now an emeritus market participant. This year’s gains produced in me no joy, only a sort of disappointing satisfaction amid a sea of caution.
Hence I am turning to other things, including planning for when I am gone, and involving myself where the rubber hits the road. There are certainly exciting and interesting things going on, but for me those things are not now to be found in the markets.
Maserati wrote:
This year’s gains produced in me no joy, only a sort of disappointing satisfaction amid a sea of caution.
?
Try to keep up wrote:
L'Oncle Bee wrote:
Understandably, you're not.
WTF kind of sentence is that?
English.
What grade did you get through?
Or maybe you in fact got through grade school, junior high, and even high school. And then attended Yale like that genius witness in the impeachment hearings, Daniel Goldman.
Who thinks the word extensive is actually extensitive.
Maserati wrote:
Yes, I can have that effect—until you realize that I am neither ambivalent nor fatalistic, and am actually more active than you likely are. Not to mention that I have had a great year on only a handful of transactions.
I am definitely not excited by goings-on, however. I have no exuberance for these markets, no love—only a dispassionate detachment, even a kind of sullen resignation.
It’s a weird feeling agip, I must admit. Maybe I’m now an emeritus market participant. This year’s gains produced in me no joy, only a sort of disappointing satisfaction amid a sea of caution.
Hence I am turning to other things, including planning for when I am gone, and involving myself where the rubber hits the road. There are certainly exciting and interesting things going on, but for me those things are not now to be found in the markets.
historically speaking, I read once that younger investors are better investors. People past 50 or 60 just get too fed up with the world...or described differently keep judging the investing world by what it was when they were 30.
End result is that they aren't willing participants in the markets anymore and that hurts their performance.
I certainly feel that, in my 50s.
agip wrote:
Maserati wrote:
Yes, I can have that effect—until you realize that I am neither ambivalent nor fatalistic, and am actually more active than you likely are. Not to mention that I have had a great year on only a handful of transactions.
I am definitely not excited by goings-on, however. I have no exuberance for these markets, no love—only a dispassionate detachment, even a kind of sullen resignation.
It’s a weird feeling agip, I must admit. Maybe I’m now an emeritus market participant. This year’s gains produced in me no joy, only a sort of disappointing satisfaction amid a sea of caution.
Hence I am turning to other things, including planning for when I am gone, and involving myself where the rubber hits the road. There are certainly exciting and interesting things going on, but for me those things are not now to be found in the markets.
historically speaking, I read once that younger investors are better investors. People past 50 or 60 just get too fed up with the world...or described differently keep judging the investing world by what it was when they were 30.
End result is that they aren't willing participants in the markets anymore and that hurts their performance.
I certainly feel that, in my 50s.
Hopefully by looking at data you realize the promised 10% equity returns have been half that the last 20 years. In your 50s or 60s you should actually look at the facts rather than just accept narratives. That is what should come with age and experience. Why do investment firms hire traders right out of college?
Alex sees a Dumas wrote:
Try to keep up wrote:
English.
What grade did you get through?
Or maybe you in fact got through grade school, junior high, and even high school. And then attended Yale like that genius witness in the impeachment hearings, Daniel Goldman.
Who thinks the word extensive is actually extensitive.
People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.
Myanmar wrote:
Alex sees a Dumas wrote:
What grade did you get through?
Or maybe you in fact got through grade school, junior high, and even high school. And then attended Yale like that genius witness in the impeachment hearings, Daniel Goldman.
Who thinks the word extensive is actually extensitive.
People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.
Did you actually think that one up all by yourself.
So clever.
I weep for the caliber of posters on this thread
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
agip wrote:
historically speaking, I read once that younger investors are better investors. People past 50 or 60 just get too fed up with the world...or described differently keep judging the investing world by what it was when they were 30.
End result is that they aren't willing participants in the markets anymore and that hurts their performance.
I certainly feel that, in my 50s.
Hopefully by looking at data you realize the promised 10% equity returns have been half that the last 20 years. In your 50s or 60s you should actually look at the facts rather than just accept narratives. That is what should come with age and experience. Why do investment firms hire traders right out of college?
or...
Hopefully by the time you are in your 50s and 60s you realize cherry picking time frames to prove a point is unwise
agip wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Hopefully by looking at data you realize the promised 10% equity returns have been half that the last 20 years. In your 50s or 60s you should actually look at the facts rather than just accept narratives. That is what should come with age and experience. Why do investment firms hire traders right out of college?
or...
Hopefully by the time you are in your 50s and 60s you realize cherry picking time frames to prove a point is unwise
Someone doesn't understand the concept of cherry picking.
It is not cherry picking to have the end point the present day.
Nor is it cherry picking to review performance over the past 10 years, 20 years, 30 years, etc.
Since we're doing that self reflection thing, when it comes to the markets, I can't complain. LOL.
And I don't think i would have done anything differently.
agip wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Hopefully by looking at data you realize the promised 10% equity returns have been half that the last 20 years. In your 50s or 60s you should actually look at the facts rather than just accept narratives. That is what should come with age and experience. Why do investment firms hire traders right out of college?
or...
Hopefully by the time you are in your 50s and 60s you realize cherry picking time frames to prove a point is unwise
No, you have fallen into the trap of your paycheck. Your bullishness is dependent upon it, for now.
Alex sees a Dummeras wrote:
I weep for the caliber of posters on this thread
Oh, the irony!
Someone doesn't wrote:
agip wrote:
or...
Hopefully by the time you are in your 50s and 60s you realize cherry picking time frames to prove a point is unwise
Someone doesn't understand the concept of cherry picking.
It is not cherry picking to have the end point the present day.
Nor is it cherry picking to review performance over the past 10 years, 20 years, 30 years, etc.
It is tradition in the industry to quote the double digit returns in equities. When that is nothing close to what investors have earned, and you are taking a snap shot at top of the biggest bubble ever. Of course this is required to maintain the cult of equities, keep retail investors all in, and the profits flowing as long as possible to the financial industry.
So I am to understand that investment options outside of equities are quite limited in their returns, with low interest rates and all, and that has to be some of the drive not to be out of the market.
But it's estimated that three quarters of the market is institutional investors, and if that is the case, this thing is hardly driven by some smaller, reportedly misinformed segment of the market (the retail investors you describe).
Other ideas?
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Someone doesn't wrote:
Someone doesn't understand the concept of cherry picking.
It is not cherry picking to have the end point the present day.
Nor is it cherry picking to review performance over the past 10 years, 20 years, 30 years, etc.
It is tradition in the industry to quote the double digit returns in equities. When that is nothing close to what investors have earned, and you are taking a snap shot at top of the biggest bubble ever. Of course this is required to maintain the cult of equities, keep retail investors all in, and the profits flowing as long as possible to the financial industry.
it's 20 year returns you'll use this year
next year you will use 21
then the year after that 22.
Always, you will pick 1999 as your starting point.
In 2022 the 20 year numbers will be fantastic - right from to bottom of the tech crash. Will that make Igy all bullish?
Seattle prattle (on a different, read: faster, browser) wrote:
So I am to understand that investment options outside of equities are quite limited in their returns, with low interest rates and all, and that has to be some of the drive not to be out of the market.
But it's estimated that three quarters of the market is institutional investors, and if that is the case, this thing is hardly driven by some smaller, reportedly misinformed segment of the market (the retail investors you describe).
Other ideas?
Not true, retail investors are encouraged to stay in the, while institutional investors maintain both larger bond and alternative investment allocations. Retail investors become liquidity to the marketplace. Institutions are not buy and hold.
“Institutional investors invest these assets in a variety of classes. The standard allocation according to McKinsey's 2017 report on the industry is approximately 40% of assets to equity and 40% to fixed income. Another 20% of total assets were allocated to alternative investments like real estate, private equity, hedge funds, cash, and other areas.”
agip wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
It is tradition in the industry to quote the double digit returns in equities. When that is nothing close to what investors have earned, and you are taking a snap shot at top of the biggest bubble ever. Of course this is required to maintain the cult of equities, keep retail investors all in, and the profits flowing as long as possible to the financial industry.
it's 20 year returns you'll use this year
next year you will use 21
then the year after that 22.
Always, you will pick 1999 as your starting point.
In 2022 the 20 year numbers will be fantastic - right from to bottom of the tech crash. Will that make Igy all bullish?
No, I don’t think so, by then the market will be down 65%. You may learn a lesson you have yet to experience as a financial advisor managing other people’s money. It won’t be fun and you will experience many sleepless nights.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
agip wrote:
it's 20 year returns you'll use this year
next year you will use 21
then the year after that 22.
Always, you will pick 1999 as your starting point.
In 2022 the 20 year numbers will be fantastic - right from to bottom of the tech crash. Will that make Igy all bullish?
No, I don’t think so, by then the market will be down 65%. You may learn a lesson you have yet to experience as a financial advisor managing other people’s money. It won’t be fun and you will experience many sleepless nights.
Igy, come on. It's me. Agip. We've been doing this for years now.
You used to use 10 year returns, pegged to 2005/7 because they were bad.
Then when you couldn't use 10 year returns anymore because they were pegged to the 2008 lows and suddenly became good, you switched to 20 year returns, pegged to the top of the tech bubble.
And in 2022, when 20 year returns become good, you'll find something else to make the stock market look bad.
You can't pull the wool over this six-legged dragon. It's been too many posts.