Comments on Gary Griswold's articles RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.com/author/gary-griswold/articles http://seekingalpha.com/article/146166-seeking-safety-and-alpha-at-the-same-time?source=feed#comment-568969 568969 Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:25:24 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/146166-seeking-safety-and-alpha-at-the-same-time?source=feed#comment-568345 568345 Tue, 30 Jun 2009 10:30:56 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/143156-in-defense-of-buy-and-hold?source=feed#comment-548224 548224 I am in agreement with Jasper M above! There is neither excuse nor > rationale for accepting crippling losses through the use of a strategy > which owes it's following to the experiences of the last century > and ignores present market trading realities! > > There is a huge difference between 'timing the market' and 'trend > following' based on a combination of fundamental and technical analysis! > While timing exact market tops and bottoms may be a fool's errand, > recognizing trends through careful analysis is not, and watching > the direction 5, 10,15,25,and 50 day moving averages will tell you > most of what you need to know. > > 'Buy and Hold' cannot only be called a lazy man's strategy; it really > is no strategy at all!]]> Tue, 16 Jun 2009 00:04:51 -0400

On Jun 15 06:19 AM Jim Hawthorne wrote:

> I am in agreement with Jasper M above! There is neither excuse nor
> rationale for accepting crippling losses through the use of a strategy
> which owes it's following to the experiences of the last century
> and ignores present market trading realities!
>
> There is a huge difference between 'timing the market' and 'trend
> following' based on a combination of fundamental and technical analysis!
> While timing exact market tops and bottoms may be a fool's errand,
> recognizing trends through careful analysis is not, and watching
> the direction 5, 10,15,25,and 50 day moving averages will tell you
> most of what you need to know.
>
> 'Buy and Hold' cannot only be called a lazy man's strategy; it really
> is no strategy at all!]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/143156-in-defense-of-buy-and-hold?source=feed#comment-548219 548219 I mostly buy and hold, but the responders on this board have truly > pointed out the foolishness of that. Of course, the market already > has ponted this out too. > The problem is that traders and market maker specialists continually > drive stocks to levels above and below intrinsic values even in relatively > stable times.. > It's lilke the coin clipping of midieval times. A buy and holder > is continually subjected to having the value of his holdings clipped > by the highly motivated bright minds. > Still, despite the markert collapse eight or nine of my 20 holdings > are above or near what I paid for them, when factoring in dividend > income. These are purchases within the last one to four years.
So > in half my portfolio buy and hold beat the DOW, but the losses in > my broader holdings naturally offset that because some of these were > crushed. > You can buy and hold a Kinross Gold, a Unilever, a Jefferies Securities, > but not Allied Irish Banks, New Ireland Fund or Brandywine Real Estate. > > So it looks like buy and hold can be selectively applied, as can > short term trading. > Too late have I figured that out.]]> Mon, 15 Jun 2009 23:55:11 -0400
It's not that hard. The above posters that explain following trends and/or moving averages are 100% correct. What is important is to catch the major changes in trends. If you go to dhshort.com and read what he has (free) and his analysis you will understand. His site is excellent and shows lots of valuable free information. If you had followed his moving average indicators, you would have been totally out of the market in in Dec/08 or Jan/09 and saved yourself a fortune. Imagine being totally out of the carnage with all your 2008 profits locked in. So I certainly would agree that buy and hold is essentially worthless. Thus the point is, as doug short points out, to catch most of the upside and miss most of the downside. If you can do that, you will far far far outperform most investors including the so-called experts. Nobody and I mean nobody catches all of the upside and misses all of the downside ... as that is more luck than smart investing.


On Jun 15 10:23 AM swaps wrote:

> I mostly buy and hold, but the responders on this board have truly
> pointed out the foolishness of that. Of course, the market already
> has ponted this out too.
> The problem is that traders and market maker specialists continually
> drive stocks to levels above and below intrinsic values even in relatively
> stable times..
> It's lilke the coin clipping of midieval times. A buy and holder
> is continually subjected to having the value of his holdings clipped
> by the highly motivated bright minds.
> Still, despite the markert collapse eight or nine of my 20 holdings
> are above or near what I paid for them, when factoring in dividend
> income. These are purchases within the last one to four years.
So
> in half my portfolio buy and hold beat the DOW, but the losses in
> my broader holdings naturally offset that because some of these were
> crushed.
> You can buy and hold a Kinross Gold, a Unilever, a Jefferies Securities,
> but not Allied Irish Banks, New Ireland Fund or Brandywine Real Estate.
>
> So it looks like buy and hold can be selectively applied, as can
> short term trading.
> Too late have I figured that out.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/143156-in-defense-of-buy-and-hold?source=feed#comment-548035 548035 Mon, 15 Jun 2009 20:14:48 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/143156-in-defense-of-buy-and-hold?source=feed#comment-548018 548018 Mon, 15 Jun 2009 20:05:20 -0400
As mentioned above, there are numerous strategies that can be employed to invest/trade in the market. Some are better suited to certain market conditions. An investor has the choice of either finding the "style" that best suits them, and employing it consistently, with the understanding that, under certain conditions, he'll "underperform". The much harder alternative is to become at least reasonably adept in various strategies, and being able to figure out which one is best suited to the current conditions.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/143156-in-defense-of-buy-and-hold?source=feed#comment-547470 547470 Mon, 15 Jun 2009 14:24:05 -0400
You can sell your best stocks when they drop to your stop-loss, and buy them back later. Even if the buy-back price is higher, the difference in cost plus dealing is simply an insurance premium against wallowing for 20 years, going nowhere and losing due to inflation.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/143156-in-defense-of-buy-and-hold?source=feed#comment-547071 547071 Mon, 15 Jun 2009 10:23:46 -0400 The problem is that traders and market maker specialists continually drive stocks to levels above and below intrinsic values even in relatively stable times..
It's lilke the coin clipping of midieval times. A buy and holder is continually subjected to having the value of his holdings clipped by the highly motivated bright minds.
Still, despite the markert collapse eight or nine of my 20 holdings are above or near what I paid for them, when factoring in dividend income. These are purchases within the last one to four years.
So in half my portfolio buy and hold beat the DOW, but the losses in my broader holdings naturally offset that because some of these were crushed.
You can buy and hold a Kinross Gold, a Unilever, a Jefferies Securities, but not Allied Irish Banks, New Ireland Fund or Brandywine Real Estate.
So it looks like buy and hold can be selectively applied, as can short term trading.
Too late have I figured that out.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/143156-in-defense-of-buy-and-hold?source=feed#comment-547020 547020 Mon, 15 Jun 2009 09:55:01 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/143156-in-defense-of-buy-and-hold?source=feed#comment-547019 547019 Mon, 15 Jun 2009 09:54:45 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/143156-in-defense-of-buy-and-hold?source=feed#comment-546733 546733 Mon, 15 Jun 2009 06:19:04 -0400
There is a huge difference between 'timing the market' and 'trend following' based on a combination of fundamental and technical analysis! While timing exact market tops and bottoms may be a fool's errand, recognizing trends through careful analysis is not, and watching the direction 5, 10,15,25,and 50 day moving averages will tell you most of what you need to know.

'Buy and Hold' cannot only be called a lazy man's strategy; it really is no strategy at all!]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/143156-in-defense-of-buy-and-hold?source=feed#comment-546724 546724 Mon, 15 Jun 2009 06:10:12 -0400
Secondly, the BAH strategy is in some respects similar to the "fire-and-forget" method of the army: your fire your missile ("buy") and the device - with some or no intelligence - is hopefully going to hit the target ("holding"). The probability of success is rather variable, based on the quality of the device (the share), the moment of firing it (the timing of the buy) and the elusiveness of the target (market conditions as well as the results of the target company at the time of the eventual sell). Hence, the somewhat fire-and-forget BAH investing strategy may be suitable for investors with either limited ability to manoeuver their investments on a daily or a short-term basis, or have information or faith leading them to believe in the value of a long-term holding of a specific share or an index, e.g. based on some long-term trend or a prospect for a specific commodity or product.

On the opposite side are investors whose strategies are based on exploiting short-term technical movements, or have specific information generally not available on a timely basis to the BAH type investors.

It would appear that in the times of heightened volatility, market timing may offer greater short-term gains. Or losses. Hence, the market timing activity would not generally appeal or be available to the majority of investors, who would prefer less frequent involvement with their investment and are prepared to accept potentially lesser returns.

The problem remains with a degree of risk: neither market timing, nor BAH strategy offer certainty of returns. The difference is only in timing: the BAH may take longer to ascertain the success of investment - for the day traders all is clear gratifyingly quickly!


]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/143156-in-defense-of-buy-and-hold?source=feed#comment-546696 546696 Mon, 15 Jun 2009 05:24:06 -0400
Using the failure of an average participant as an excuse not to apply one's intellect to an issue is defeatism. And defeatist prophesies tend to be self-fulfilling.

I strongly suspect that those willing Try market timing are more likely to learn how to optimize their approaches over time then those who start with a "buy and hold" approach, as holding implies implies a considerably more passive approach, inviting inaction.

I confess my biases: I have made a fortune timing, after losing a (smaller) fortune holding. And I cannot imagine how a bias for holding can serve one well in an environment of an overall decline that threatens to have generational duration.]]>