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.
Markets around the world were in rally mode today. The Nikkei gained 0.74%, the Shanghai 0.48%, the SENSEX 0.51%, and the EURO STOXX 50 rose 0.56%. Current-Market-Snapshot
Reply to @hank: WIsh I had $10,000 back in 1929 (also wish I was alive to invest). Anyway, here's how one of the oldest mutuals (VWELX), which is still alive and well today, has done over that so called "plateau" Fischer spoke of (1929-2013). Interesting fact...it first lost 60% of its value by 1932 so I guess in the short term Fischer was kinda right. Staying the course with your intial $10,000 investment would have netted you between $6-8 million by 2013. But you would have doubled your money to $15 million if you had timed your investment right and bought in 1932. Here's the pretty picture from (1929 - 2013):
Reply to @bee: No argument there bee. Depending on the stock index used, dividends earned, and whether you take into consideration that consumer prices fell drastically during that period, estimates for "break even" range anywhere from 4.5 to 25 years. That doesn't sound bad - until you consider, heck, we got folk today charting their "returns" week-by-week. And selling perfectly fine funds if they "underperform" for a year or two. ... Am inclined to believe the kind of time horizon we're talking about there exceeds the capabilities of 90% of us - either because we need the $$ sooner or we simply lack the patience required. But - it's fun to think about the kind of growth potential that chart shows.
Wondering too ... might one have done even better owning gold, farmland, or one of those classic autos from the 1920s?
Reply to @Old_Joe: There's really a Whack-O certifying service? Did it cost you money (aside from stock market losses)? If it's free, I might want a certificate.
High quality farmland would have won, if you'd had the money, but you'd be dead now. Classic autos before 1920 would trump farmland, but you have to find the buyer, and you'd have to have purchased them after you were alive and had money (or you'd be dead now).
Probably be more useful to construct probabilities dating from the 70's, since you might actually have had a chance to invest (although my gestalt is that most posters would have been investing or speculating in the 80's or later). I should have bought Magellan, but I bought Nieman and Rockwell lithographs. Oh. well, we all get only 6x3, unless cremated (cheaper, so it's my choice).
Hi STB65: Self-certified, kinda like "self-regulating" for business and financial powerhouses. I'd make you a nice certificate for free, but I'm right in the middle of major house repair/remodeling, and my wife will kill me if she finds me fooling around on the computer. Again.
Comments
(From: Irving Fisher - Economist, 1929)
Old Joe - Certified Whacko (2013)
Wondering too ... might one have done even better owning gold, farmland, or one of those classic autos from the 1920s?
Did it cost you money (aside from stock market losses)?
If it's free, I might want a certificate.
Classic autos before 1920 would trump farmland, but you have to find the buyer, and you'd have to have purchased them after you were alive and had money (or you'd be dead now).
Probably be more useful to construct probabilities dating from the 70's, since you might actually have had a chance to invest (although my gestalt is that most posters would have been investing or speculating in the 80's or later). I should have bought Magellan, but I bought Nieman and Rockwell lithographs. Oh. well, we all get only 6x3, unless cremated (cheaper, so it's my choice).