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 : Value Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Paul Senior who wrote (5497)	12/20/1998 9:51:00 AM
From: cfimx	Read Replies (6) \| Respond to of 78666

>>>I have a real problem with what fund managers SAY and what they actually do. <<< What real EVIDENCE can you provide that Sanborn is guilty of this, as you have implied twice? >>Your question about how Graham would respond to someone who has no use for price/book or div. yields or pe ratios - if Sanborn actually meant what he said -<< Why do you DOUBT what he says? What makes you doubt him Paul? >>However, our discussion about Sanborn and other value investors is no evidence that Graham's methods are invalid OR outdated for the individual investor.<< I named TEN GREAT MMs plus Buffett/Mungerthat have repudiated Graham. I challenged you to come up with ONE WHO HASN"T and you couldn't. The burden is on you to to prove Graham's methods are VALID. You have even stated on this board that you aren't sure if YOU are doing that well with them. >>You have criticized posts here about stocks wherein the posters do not prove that they are value stocks. I look forward to seeing posts from you which will define those 1998-style value stocks you have bought -- ones which are not dependent on pe ratios,div. yields, price/book or the cyclical nature of the businesses.<< You don't have to look forward Paul. Take a look again at my first post to you on Saturday. I valued ecp FOR YOU without using the trappings of Graham's ratios.