Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : The Naked Truth - Big Kahuna a Myth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: accountclosed who wrote (73720)	11/4/1999 7:13:00 PM
From: IceShark	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86076

Stubing, I see your shameless promotion got my post of last night in the rap. -g- Guess I should have worked a myth comment into it but I was too tired from all this crazy market crap and getting things done before taking off for bambi hunting. Now be sure to click on the rap numerous times 'cause Fleck says I get a royalty of .00001 cents per hit. -g-

To: accountclosed who wrote (73720)	11/4/1999 7:16:00 PM
From: BGR	Respond to of 86076

AntMan, IMO, risk preference is a personal and not market choice, as market levels should not increase or decrease risk. This, of course, is where I differ with most on this thread. Secondly, since future returns can never be predicted, in my personal asset allocation model I always use past average returns over as many years as I can get. Thus, abnormal (either high or low) returns for one year IMO should not affect allocation choices for the next year when the horrizon is fairly long (and hence risk preference quite stable over time). Of course, over shorter spans things are different as ones risk preference changes dramatically with time in that case, and your examples make complete sense. JMH and uneducated O. -BGR.