5 Likes
I think this is very naive about 2Q. These guys represent a lot of managed retail money. Stay the course advice. Things to come will be hellish.
It can take 1.5 to 3 years to get to a bottom in the markets.
Nobody knows that is why we watch, but making up your mind because of a gut feeling or political stance is stupid. The market will tell you all you need to know.
Dear Andy,
Dig into the history. Stop assuming nonsense.
Especially stop being a retail investor.
I wonder about that.
My LTB&H stock portfolio is 4% off my November 2024 all-time high. I hope those using interest rates and “market whispers” to trade in and out of the market are enjoying equal success and sleeping as soundly as I am.
intercst
3 Likes
Listening to you is like listening to a broken clock. You have been trying to scare people for over two years that we were going into recession. When we finally do I assume you will tell people how smart you are but you and I will know the truth.
Stop being a graduate of the Connecticut school system.
Only in Connecticut can you go to college without knowing how to read and write.
2 Likes
Hmm November why wouldn’t you use the High? That would seem the proper way to do it. Or are you saying you were underperfoming the indexes?
Heck, you can go to Harvard “without knowing how to read and write”, as long as Daddy makes a large enough contribution to the university.
intercst
Link please. 
How about 43, Yale grad.
Is that close enough?
1 Like
Yes it is, link please.
November happens to be when my portfolio hit its all time high. I don’t follow day-to-day market gyrations, only the accumulation of “skim-free” wealth over time. I’d been solidly beating the S&P 500 by about 1.5% per annum from 1981-1994. Then after I retired in 1994, the late 1990’s bull market produced spectacular results for me on the strength of DELL and Pfizer. The 2000’s and 2010’s more or less matched the market, while lately Eli Lilly has become another DELL.
I pay far more attention to “skim reduction” than stock selection and market timing.
intercst
2 Likes
Ok then you are not invested in the index funds like I thought you were. That is interesting.
{{ Link please? }}
I’m pretty sure Flyerboy can confirm the existence of the “Z-list”.
{{ MostlyLong 43, Yale }}
In the 1960’s and early 1970’s when I was in grade school and high school, Yale went to a more merit-based admissions system. Hilarity ensued when large donations started to dry up, and the architect of the plan was cashiered.
{{ Editor’s Note: In 1963 Kingman Brewster was named president of Yale University. Over the next several years, he transformed what he said had been a finishing school for the children of the rich and the well-born into a great academic institution where merit and equality of educational opportunity held sway. }}
intercst
2 Likes
When I retired in 1994, I was focused on skim reduction and held a portfolio of about 20 stocks, mostly Tech and Drugs. That gave me an expense ratio of 2 or 3 basis points during a time when Vanguard’s S&P 500 index fund had an expense ratio of about 0.20%. As index funds have reduced their expense ratios over the years, I been moving more of my money to index funds and BRK, as long as I can do so without taking much of a capita gains tax hit. BRK is now about 10% of my net worth and index funds about 30%. The other 60% is still in individual stocks.
If I was starting out today, I’d definitely just put everything in a low-fee fund like Fidelity’s Index 500 expense ratio 0.015% FXAIX.
intercst
3 Likes
No wonder they think they are smart. It’s all about who they are competing against. That explains it all.
But because you didn’t is why you are outperforming the index’s
There’s admittedly a bit of luck in that. I take credit for the decision to invest in Tech and Drugs, but it was luck that I happened to included DELL and Pfizer in the portfolio. In hindsight, if I split the money in 1994 between sector funds in Tech and Health Care, I’d have about 50% more today. But you didn’t even have to do that. Merely holding the S&P 500 over the last 30 years would have grown your money about 20-fold. That’s more than enough to make you comfortably wealthy.
intercst
1 Like
Actually it wouldn’t, 30 years ago if you put 10,000 dollars in the S&P and grew it 20 fold it would only equal 200,000 dollars. That is a paltry sum.
1 Like
Don’t get me wrong. There are plenty of super smart students in Ivy League colleges, by far the majority. It’s just that Administrators realized that they have to keep a place for a few laggards to sustain the Endowment.
intercst
3 Likes