Just a thought, but the reason your point isn't taken seriously here is that you insist on implying that "all" longterm investors beat "all" shortterm traders. That's just stupid. If you had said "on average" you might have gotten some agreement.
My point is very clear... Active traders are using a far inferior system to long term investors. The only people I see getting rich using the short term approach are the brokerage houses. Continuing to operating on a system that has been proven to be ineffective in creating long term results can lead to devastating results http://www.wadecook.com/
"""Your comments while amusing do not address the issues they attempt to mock."""
What is the "issue"? And this time, pls concisely explain it in less than 3000 words so your point doesn't get lost in the verbage. No offense, but after several very long posts, your point remains unclear.
"""So to further my studies I read over twenty investing books from the prominent authors in the field of investing."""
I think you just proved how they beat the street...... on your purchases alone... ;-)
Micro movers� being one who believes the joy of truth is the journey to it. I will expound upon some of me earlier commentary on active traders (longs & shorts, day traders, micro movers and the like). When I started taking an interest in investing the first book I read was by Wade Cook, he taught that one could make twenty percent per month by playing micro moves in the market. So to further my studies I read over twenty investing books from the prominent authors in the field of investing. They all had different approaches but as read on a clear picture appeared to me, there were two main groups, those that focused on the movement of the stock price and those that focused on the companies themselves. I found this very interesting that two people could look at the same stock and see to very different things. So how was I to decide which school of thought was correct? I looked at the results. Now some people look at the short term let�s say five to ten years. But that can be very deceiving especially in the nineties. I mean a rising tide lifts all boats, so an extended period of skyrocketing markets it is easy to post gains. So I looked for the top performing investors that have been thru some tough markets and have proven out a long-term winning investing strategy. A provocative thing accrued when I found this list of market beaters (some by more than 10% per year over a thirty year period!). They were all from the second group those that view stocks as companies, not little pieces of paper to be traded around. So when I asked on this board if any one knew of any active traders that also had beaten the market. The only response I received is was �I beat the market� well that�s great and all but if there were truly successful active traders they would have long ago appeared on lists of the richest Americans like many of the other long term investors I listed have. �Joseph Frankel Rosenfield, Philip Carret, Charlie Munger, Warren Buffett, Marty Whitman, Walter Schloss, Tom Knapp, Dave Dodd, Ben Graham, Ed Anderson, Bill Ruane, Rick Guerin, Stan Perlmeter, Lou Simpson, Ian Cumming, Joseph Steinberg, David R. Carr, Jr, Larry D. Coats, Jr, Matthew F. Sauer and Richard T. Cunniff�� So until someone can produce a body of contradictory evidence that has some creditability, I will continue to take advantage of the inefficiencies that irrational trading creates. Cheers & Long live the truth!!!
"""If there truly are active traders that can make the returns you speak of then were are they?"""
What language are your receivers set to?? At least two of us have said we have done it. You keep blathering on about how it can't be done. Therefore I can only assume you don't find us to be acceptable names. We don't make the Wall Street Journal much these days. Where was it you expected us to log in our tax forms for you?
"celebrity industry names" Anybody can say I beat the market and so did my 10 friends... If there truly are active traders that can make the returns you speak of then were are they? Take a look a Wade Cook the big shot trader he made news http://www.wadecook.com/ I just don't see gamblers making any real returns over any real time frame.
<I agree completely. Apparently he wanted bigger celebrity names than you or I. >
I don't think that it is really fair to compare the big fund managers with small players, so he does have a minor point right.
Fund managers generally have a "fuduciary responsibility" that we don't have. They have to "diversify" to meet that requirement where we have no such obligation.
Also, our size gives us agility that funds don't have. I can buy 10K of a $30 stock and trade in and out for a $10K profit in a day without moving the market. Trading 1M shares in and out is impossible.