Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › Jeremy Grantham’s 1Q09 Letter: Fantastic as usual
- This topic has 200 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 7 months ago by
CA renter.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 12, 2009 at 4:30 PM #398056May 12, 2009 at 4:37 PM #397400
davelj
Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][
Ben Graham. I’ve made more money over a protracted period of time following Graham’s Theorem than with any other “system” or “school of thought”.[/quote]
I like Ben Graham’s approach, in theory, but recall that he got destroyed – even using his “conservative” approach – during the depression. If memory serves, his accounts were down 70%+. Now, over time, he did very well in absolute and relative terms, but he suffered a lot at times.
Also, interestingly, using Ben Graham’s approach, you would have been out of the market completely from 1994 until February 2009 – just investing in high-grade bonds. Which would have been exactly the right long-term strategy!! But painful at times watching the Bubblicious market highs.
May 12, 2009 at 4:37 PM #397649Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][
Ben Graham. I’ve made more money over a protracted period of time following Graham’s Theorem than with any other “system” or “school of thought”.[/quote]
I like Ben Graham’s approach, in theory, but recall that he got destroyed – even using his “conservative” approach – during the depression. If memory serves, his accounts were down 70%+. Now, over time, he did very well in absolute and relative terms, but he suffered a lot at times.
Also, interestingly, using Ben Graham’s approach, you would have been out of the market completely from 1994 until February 2009 – just investing in high-grade bonds. Which would have been exactly the right long-term strategy!! But painful at times watching the Bubblicious market highs.
May 12, 2009 at 4:37 PM #397873Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][
Ben Graham. I’ve made more money over a protracted period of time following Graham’s Theorem than with any other “system” or “school of thought”.[/quote]
I like Ben Graham’s approach, in theory, but recall that he got destroyed – even using his “conservative” approach – during the depression. If memory serves, his accounts were down 70%+. Now, over time, he did very well in absolute and relative terms, but he suffered a lot at times.
Also, interestingly, using Ben Graham’s approach, you would have been out of the market completely from 1994 until February 2009 – just investing in high-grade bonds. Which would have been exactly the right long-term strategy!! But painful at times watching the Bubblicious market highs.
May 12, 2009 at 4:37 PM #397931Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][
Ben Graham. I’ve made more money over a protracted period of time following Graham’s Theorem than with any other “system” or “school of thought”.[/quote]
I like Ben Graham’s approach, in theory, but recall that he got destroyed – even using his “conservative” approach – during the depression. If memory serves, his accounts were down 70%+. Now, over time, he did very well in absolute and relative terms, but he suffered a lot at times.
Also, interestingly, using Ben Graham’s approach, you would have been out of the market completely from 1994 until February 2009 – just investing in high-grade bonds. Which would have been exactly the right long-term strategy!! But painful at times watching the Bubblicious market highs.
May 12, 2009 at 4:37 PM #398072Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][
Ben Graham. I’ve made more money over a protracted period of time following Graham’s Theorem than with any other “system” or “school of thought”.[/quote]
I like Ben Graham’s approach, in theory, but recall that he got destroyed – even using his “conservative” approach – during the depression. If memory serves, his accounts were down 70%+. Now, over time, he did very well in absolute and relative terms, but he suffered a lot at times.
Also, interestingly, using Ben Graham’s approach, you would have been out of the market completely from 1994 until February 2009 – just investing in high-grade bonds. Which would have been exactly the right long-term strategy!! But painful at times watching the Bubblicious market highs.
May 12, 2009 at 4:43 PM #397406carlsbadworker
Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Most investors, however, cannot read a financial statement. A lot of CEOs cannot read one, either (I’ve worked with more than my fair share of them). [/quote]
I would agree with that completely, but I’m afraid that it may help scaredycat’s argument that any fool with enough luck can be a good investor as wll as a CEO. It is true that luck could explain almost everything in the world, but still I think we piggs analyze the data rigorously because we think it will impact the probability of the luck to our favors. Otherwise, what’s the point of learning anything?
May 12, 2009 at 4:43 PM #397655Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Most investors, however, cannot read a financial statement. A lot of CEOs cannot read one, either (I’ve worked with more than my fair share of them). [/quote]
I would agree with that completely, but I’m afraid that it may help scaredycat’s argument that any fool with enough luck can be a good investor as wll as a CEO. It is true that luck could explain almost everything in the world, but still I think we piggs analyze the data rigorously because we think it will impact the probability of the luck to our favors. Otherwise, what’s the point of learning anything?
May 12, 2009 at 4:43 PM #397880Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Most investors, however, cannot read a financial statement. A lot of CEOs cannot read one, either (I’ve worked with more than my fair share of them). [/quote]
I would agree with that completely, but I’m afraid that it may help scaredycat’s argument that any fool with enough luck can be a good investor as wll as a CEO. It is true that luck could explain almost everything in the world, but still I think we piggs analyze the data rigorously because we think it will impact the probability of the luck to our favors. Otherwise, what’s the point of learning anything?
May 12, 2009 at 4:43 PM #397937Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Most investors, however, cannot read a financial statement. A lot of CEOs cannot read one, either (I’ve worked with more than my fair share of them). [/quote]
I would agree with that completely, but I’m afraid that it may help scaredycat’s argument that any fool with enough luck can be a good investor as wll as a CEO. It is true that luck could explain almost everything in the world, but still I think we piggs analyze the data rigorously because we think it will impact the probability of the luck to our favors. Otherwise, what’s the point of learning anything?
May 12, 2009 at 4:43 PM #398080Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Most investors, however, cannot read a financial statement. A lot of CEOs cannot read one, either (I’ve worked with more than my fair share of them). [/quote]
I would agree with that completely, but I’m afraid that it may help scaredycat’s argument that any fool with enough luck can be a good investor as wll as a CEO. It is true that luck could explain almost everything in the world, but still I think we piggs analyze the data rigorously because we think it will impact the probability of the luck to our favors. Otherwise, what’s the point of learning anything?
May 12, 2009 at 5:13 PM #397416scaredyclassic
Participantim not sure how “investment” is defined, but all i want is to preserve some value out of the something of value i’ve managed to save. I could “invest” it in thebank, or in stoks, or in “value” stocks, ot gold, or oil, or whatever i think is most liekly to retain that “value’. I tend to think the best way to preserve value is gold, silver and oil. held for 10, 20, 30, 100 years, gold and silver will definitely hold value. oil, probably. most stocks will be gone. if indeed there is still an exchange.
May 12, 2009 at 5:13 PM #397665Participantim not sure how “investment” is defined, but all i want is to preserve some value out of the something of value i’ve managed to save. I could “invest” it in thebank, or in stoks, or in “value” stocks, ot gold, or oil, or whatever i think is most liekly to retain that “value’. I tend to think the best way to preserve value is gold, silver and oil. held for 10, 20, 30, 100 years, gold and silver will definitely hold value. oil, probably. most stocks will be gone. if indeed there is still an exchange.
May 12, 2009 at 5:13 PM #397890Participantim not sure how “investment” is defined, but all i want is to preserve some value out of the something of value i’ve managed to save. I could “invest” it in thebank, or in stoks, or in “value” stocks, ot gold, or oil, or whatever i think is most liekly to retain that “value’. I tend to think the best way to preserve value is gold, silver and oil. held for 10, 20, 30, 100 years, gold and silver will definitely hold value. oil, probably. most stocks will be gone. if indeed there is still an exchange.
May 12, 2009 at 5:13 PM #397947Participantim not sure how “investment” is defined, but all i want is to preserve some value out of the something of value i’ve managed to save. I could “invest” it in thebank, or in stoks, or in “value” stocks, ot gold, or oil, or whatever i think is most liekly to retain that “value’. I tend to think the best way to preserve value is gold, silver and oil. held for 10, 20, 30, 100 years, gold and silver will definitely hold value. oil, probably. most stocks will be gone. if indeed there is still an exchange.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.