Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
Support MFO
Donate through PayPal
Blast from the past ... Supposedly safe funds that weren't (2008)
Some discussions of late concerning relative safety of various cash & bond investments. Much was learned in 2008 - so hopefully the errors in judgement, particularly at Schwab and Oppenheimer won't be repeated. It's sobering, however, to think that even the most conservative of the category - plain vanilla money market funds - came under immense pressure and required emergency government backing.
"Putting 2008 in perspective: It's been said the crisis was akin to the proverbial "Hundred Year Flood"."
Yes, but "hundred year flood" is based on semi-old data and we seem to be having "hundred year floods" quite regularly these days.
By "semi-old" I mean a couple of centuries, which is not exactly a solid statistical data base even with a static climatological & geographic environment, and during which lots & lots of changes have been made to river beds, surrounding drainages, etc etc. Think of what your local landscape was a century -- or two, or three -- ago.
I would suggest that a similar scenario actually DOES apply to the investment landscape as well ( but not in the implied context) ... questionable statistical data base, along with huge "environmental" changes. Greenspan may have made the allusion, but I'd say that the comparison may have been closer than he thought, but not exactly what he intended.
We certainly need to learn from the past, but only if we a willing to go beyond the superficial numerics to search for the causes.
Comments
Yes, but "hundred year flood" is based on semi-old data and we seem to be having "hundred year floods" quite regularly these days.
By "semi-old" I mean a couple of centuries, which is not exactly a solid statistical data base even with a static climatological & geographic environment, and during which lots & lots of changes have been made to river beds, surrounding drainages, etc etc. Think of what your local landscape was a century -- or two, or three -- ago.
I would suggest that a similar scenario actually DOES apply to the investment landscape as well ( but not in the implied context) ... questionable statistical data base, along with huge "environmental" changes. Greenspan may have made the allusion, but I'd say that the comparison may have been closer than he thought, but not exactly what he intended.
We certainly need to learn from the past, but only if we a willing to go beyond the superficial numerics to search for the causes.