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.

Technology Stocks : Taiwan Semiconductor (NYSE: TSM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kas1 who wrote (517)	6/4/1999 9:08:00 AM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 684

I have not read Malakiel's work, but this argument still does not hold water for me. Perhaps you can elaborate. This is how I see it: the market is always running on the expectation of the futures and it changes accordingly as that expectation changes. This however does not constitute an efficient market. To be efficient, the market must be well aware of the significant events for the next 3 to 6 months. So unless a sudden war breaks out or a natural desaster like the Kobe earth quake happens, crashes are not justified under the efficient market theory, nor are the bubbles. Take a look at the chart of Nikkei and tell me what happend in January '89 that was not known in the November of '88. Was that event big enough to justify a 10 year bear market? What about last September and October? Did the world really change that much during those two months to justify the trippling in price of many stocks from their October lows to their December highs? I think (and please provide an alternative view) the main thing that changed was the investor sentiment and not the fundamentals. And sentiment alone does not constitute information in my book. ST