yesterday's masters of the universe
-
- Posts: 16022
- Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 7:28 am
- Location: St Louis MO
yesterday's masters of the universe
are today's cosmic dust
Thought you would find this of interest
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505123_162 ... ncol;lst;1
hope you find it helpful
Best wishes
Larry
PS I will be on Bloomber radio and TV (I think) on Thursday with Pimm Foxx (one of good interviewers) at about 5 EST
and also with Stuart Varney somewhere between 9-11 for few minutes that morning Fox Business News.
Will also be doing some videos for Yahoo finance tomorrow
Thought you would find this of interest
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505123_162 ... ncol;lst;1
hope you find it helpful
Best wishes
Larry
PS I will be on Bloomber radio and TV (I think) on Thursday with Pimm Foxx (one of good interviewers) at about 5 EST
and also with Stuart Varney somewhere between 9-11 for few minutes that morning Fox Business News.
Will also be doing some videos for Yahoo finance tomorrow
Re: yesterday's masters of the universe
My only comment is your use of percentile rankings is the reverse of what I'd expect.
Re: yesterday's masters of the universe
I'm just finishing Michael Lewis' The Big Short, where the reader gets the impression that the main characters who Lewis showcased really did (do?) have the smarts, precsience, talent, and foresightedness to see the big trends and make profitable bets on them.
Perhaps they did in 2006-2008. But that, as Larry is careful to remind us, was yesterday's success. Regression to the mean can be sudden and nasty.
Perhaps they did in 2006-2008. But that, as Larry is careful to remind us, was yesterday's success. Regression to the mean can be sudden and nasty.
"We don't see things as they are; we see them as we are." Anais Nin |
|
"Sometimes the first duty of intelligent men is the restatement of the obvious." George Orwell
Re: yesterday's masters of the universe
Selection bias. How many who succeeded are not talented? How many are talented who do not succeed?cinghiale wrote:I'm just finishing Michael Lewis' The Big Short, where the reader gets the impression that the main characters who Lewis showcased really did (do?) have the smarts, precsience, talent, and foresightedness to see the big trends and make profitable bets on them.
Re: yesterday's masters of the universe
Larry,looking forward to hear you on Pimm Fox show.I always listen to him on my way home.
- Random Musings
- Posts: 6771
- Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 3:24 pm
- Location: Pennsylvania
Re: yesterday's masters of the universe
However, "yesterday's masters of the universe" are most likely "today's wealthy and laughing all of the way to the bank".
Be nice to know what their portfolio's hold. I would venture to say that most active managers don't play their own game (or do very little).
RM
Be nice to know what their portfolio's hold. I would venture to say that most active managers don't play their own game (or do very little).
RM
I figure the odds be fifty-fifty I just might have something to say. FZ
Re: yesterday's masters of the universe
You might find this post from Kenster in late 2010 to be of interest. He was responding to a thread discussing the "current" funds to be in, and he noticed that many of the names he'd seen over the years were conspicuously absent in the "new" list. Here are the missing funds, many of which you'll probably recognize.
http://socialize.morningstar.com/NewSoc ... 1326308052
http://socialize.morningstar.com/NewSoc ... 1326308052
- nisiprius
- Advisory Board
- Posts: 52216
- Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:33 am
- Location: The terrestrial, globular, planetary hunk of matter, flattened at the poles, is my abode.--O. Henry
Re: yesterday's masters of the universe
I continue to be... fascinated... by statements like "the media was reporting that Miller's 'still got game.'" I am to make serious financial decisions about mutual fund investments by deciding whether the manager has "still got game?"
Barry Ritholtz says you need to judge whether the manager might have "lost his edge" or whether still has "fire in his belly." Ritholtz says should fire your mutual fund managers "when they become closet indexers," but also "when they fight the dominant market trend." In other words, fire 'em if they go with the flow, and fire 'em if they go against the flow! This is about as actionable as Will Rogers' "Don't gamble; take all your savings and buy some good stock and hold it till it goes up, then sell it. If it don't go up, don't buy it."
So, what do you think? Is the mojo working for Gerard C. O'Reilly (Total Stock Market)? Has Kenneth E. Volpert (Total Bond) still got game? And does Michael Perre (Total International) have fire in his belly?
Barry Ritholtz says you need to judge whether the manager might have "lost his edge" or whether still has "fire in his belly." Ritholtz says should fire your mutual fund managers "when they become closet indexers," but also "when they fight the dominant market trend." In other words, fire 'em if they go with the flow, and fire 'em if they go against the flow! This is about as actionable as Will Rogers' "Don't gamble; take all your savings and buy some good stock and hold it till it goes up, then sell it. If it don't go up, don't buy it."
So, what do you think? Is the mojo working for Gerard C. O'Reilly (Total Stock Market)? Has Kenneth E. Volpert (Total Bond) still got game? And does Michael Perre (Total International) have fire in his belly?
Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six, result happiness; Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery.
Re: yesterday's masters of the universe
Not sure about fire in his belly, but I'm pretty sure he still has 2 and 20 in his pocket!nisiprius wrote:Barry Ritholtz says you need to judge whether the manager might have "lost his edge" or whether still has "fire in his belly."
Brad
Most of my posts assume no behavioral errors.
- asset_chaos
- Posts: 2629
- Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 5:13 pm
- Location: Melbourne
Re: yesterday's masters of the universe
Bogle had it right when he said investing stars are more like comets, burning brightly for a while then returning to the frozen darkness from whence they came. Unfortunately it appears to require neither a large quantity of nor too long a duration of investing "light" to pull in the suckers' money. Of course, this can all be quantified with the distribution of investment managers' returns and how long a performance series is required to demonstrate skill over luck at the 90% confidence level. But that's really beyond the ken of most investors.
Regards, |
|
Guy
Re: yesterday's masters of the universe
Master's of the "Yesterday's Masters of the Universe" are still quizzically looking at the crystal ball - sorry a little off the original topic but not the title
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/13/busin ... e#comments
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/13/busin ... e#comments
Having freedom, food and roof is being 90% lucky in life and so is index investing. So, don't let the remaining 10% bother you.