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.

Strategies & Market Trends : MDA - Market Direction Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (72448)	3/17/2001 9:04:32 AM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 99985

By the way, while the turnips have proven their fallibility (again) on March 9th being the target bottom of the "February Massacre", their recent call on gold, seems to have ben "on the spot". Message 15480576 xau Zeev

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (72448)	3/17/2001 9:53:46 AM
From: Haim R. Branisteanu	Respond to of 99985

Zeev, that is exactly the point of Vanguard Index funds. Let other make the stock selection for you. As the SPX is used as an benchmark for compensation many just buy SPX stock and try to time them and rarely beat the averages. Haim

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (72448)	3/17/2001 12:08:34 PM
From: KymarFye	Respond to of 99985

On the next market: First, I picked up the mistaken reference to '92 from someone else (http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=15519411) Regardless - '92 wasn't the unwinding of the or a great bull of bulls, and, though I understand your point, I don't think '82 qualifies either. Maybe it was the unwinding of the great unwinding of unwindings, or the end of the unwinding of the great unwinding of unwindings... As for the returns over the long run question, another good reference appeared over on the Daytrading board, on the opinions of a certain Mr. Buffett. If you haven't already run across these remarks elsewhere, you may find them interesting: probusiness.com.au Fits the thesis we've been discussing off and on. If that kind of market develops over the next few years, it will take time for us to determine whether and, if so, to what extent the experience, strategies, techniques, reflexes, databases, and so on that we've developed over the last couple of decades can continue to be effective, how they need to be adjusted, when they need to be discarded. The whole financial superstructure - from the trading floors to the brokerage houses to the funds and institutions to the media and to the retail investors, and all the services and customs that connect them all - appears to have been overbuilt on shifting sands. In an at best low-return, rangebound market, then a number of "old-fashioned" notions like the one you mention may be revived, and a number of more recent presumptions and institutions may fade away. It's hard to imagine, for instance, that the classic index funds will attract much interest during such a period, even as trading vehicles. Those seeking higher returns may have to turn heavily to leverage of different types, as well as to more refined trading tactics. There may be an upturn in hedge funds and long/short mutual funds as well. It's also very possible that simply returning to the old ways (whichever ones you prefer) will fail: If the overall average rate of returns to (or even underperforms) historic norms, that doesn't necessarily mean that the resulting market will trade in quite the same way it did during superficially comparable periods.

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (72448)	3/17/2001 6:55:23 PM
From: ig	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 99985

The REAL Dow I wonder if someone knows how to reconstruct the Dow with its original 1950 components (and zero for those that are dead). That notion that "stocks" return an average of 7% over the "long run" may not hold that well. I'd pay to see a chart of the real Dow, a Dow that includes all the companies that were ever a part of that venerable index, with, as you say, a value of zero for all those companies that are now defunct. Surely, someone has assembled that data? ig