> However, a history of forever averaging up on the market as a whole sort of shoots a big hole in the doomsday drumbeat that has been going on for a long while now.
Well I don't know what you mean. That the market has forever risen?
Well no that isn't the case. Since 1982 it (the indexes) has risen handsomely and in step with unbroken economic stength. Prior to that the inflation-adjusted index was a loser, although if you add and compound the dividends I think you come out to the positive.
Since 1991 or so to the present the increase over time has accelerated, due mainly to the fact that a few stocks have been afforded much higher valuation multiples. Even as some of these multiples are knocked down by reality another stock comes up and takes the mantle as "carrier of the S&P". In the market as a whole, where a buck is a buck and not ten bucks for the year 2000, stocks are fairly valued and generally heavily discounted for the real possibility of mis-execution.
> Yes, at some point in time, the nets - and the market in general - will take a hit and yes, at some point in time after that both will come back to new highs. It has always been so, has it not?
No it hasn't.
> But does it matter what a company is really worth?
I agree, the stock market is a fairer and easier casino than Las Vegas. Less skill is required and success more easily obtained if value is forgotten. -g-
> I submit it makes not one whit what a company is "REALLY" worth but what people think it is worth to them at any given time. It is clear that many people think the net stocks are worth a lot of money to them - no matter what the experts say
The so-called "experts" have sold these enterprises to the public and their expertise is now completely wrapped up in the BS-ing "valuation" that they perpetuate. Internet money is funny money, monopoly money that will fall down to true value at some point. |
