Quote from jem:
Vald-
in that buzzy quote you have a market pro, who has probably hired and fired dozens of academics telling it like it is. Modern portfolio and emh contribute to the stupidity of a bubble. "It is ok to keep buying cisco because it is efficiently priced. " You respond with nothing. I thought you were more capable. But when you get hit with reality you seemed to have run away.
First of all, Vlad, not Vald, secondly I'm not running away from anything, it's just a waste of time to respond to a post that indicates the poster will probably not understand it anyway b/c of his myopic perspective. Especially in light of the fact that the question HAS already been answered, although maybe not explicitely, a number of times before in this thread. Yes, indeed, the flows of funds back and forth caused by euphoria and panick do contribute to bubbles/corrections, but blaming it on efficient portfolio mathematics or EMH makes no sense. In fact, it's just the opposite, had people believed the stocks were correctly priced haflway through the bubble, they would not be jumping on the bandwagon so much, nor would they be panicing and withdrawing funds like crazy now. The reason they were greed-preoccupied and are fear-ridden now is PRECISELY b/c they do not believe the markets are efficient. It is because they believed back then the market was STILL underpriced and they should keep buying more b/c it'd keep soaring, the sky being the limit. Now they freak out and think they need to get out b/c they think it will keep going down. THEY ARE TRYING TO TIME THE MARKET, AND EMH STATES ONE SHOULDN'T. With all due respect, if you don't understand smth that basic, replying to questions such as those in that "article" is a waste of time.
A market pro in that quote? Give me a break. Just b/c someone is doing something professionally, does not mean (at least to me) he is a pro. Pros are they who know what they are doing. Someone who asserts things asserted in that article appears to have no fucking clue.