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 : The Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ahhaha who wrote (45527)	11/15/2005 10:07:39 AM
From: Lhn5	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110194

<<In different eras different investors do better or worse than others. It is fairly easy to do ok in markets by holding, but it's only lucky to do extremely well, and no one can control how they do over time.>> The trick is to change your investing style and decision-making as the era changes. Extraordinarily difficult...but not impossible. Or at least stay out of the markets and stay conservative until the next era that fits your investment style comes around. I would agree that it is most often luck that allows an investor to do extremely well, but at least in theory you must admit that a select few may do well over an extended period of time by being 'smart'. Did you read the 'Fooled by Randomness' book? Did you write it?

To: ahhaha who wrote (45527)	11/15/2005 1:02:57 PM
From: Mr.Creosote	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110194

This type of discussion usually leads to nowhere. To say that some people have won by being lucky instead of good is not news and doesn't mean anything to anyone. In the markets we have losers and we have winners as measured by their risk-adjusted returns. Some of the losers may know a lot more than the winners but the fact is that they still lost. Some of the winners may not know what they are doing but they still won. We do not know who amongst the winners won by skill and who won by luck. But in trying to find out who really knows the biz I'rather search amongst the winners rather than the losers. In either case most of Hussman's points make sense to me and that's why I read him. You said you know the biz because you've been a hedge fund manager. Running money doesn't mean you know the biz. How do you even know that "you know the biz"? In my view those "knowing the biz" are likely to have won than lost and that's why I think Hussman may be one of those who "know the biz". Cutting down successful people like Hussman in public boards like this one is a personality characteristic usually associated with the losers.