My case? The fact that investment managers cannot produce results has been proven over and over again. It's not my case, it is a simple fact about reality. All you need to do is review the WSJ Dartboard Contest.
In the Dartboard Contest, managers had every incentive to prove what they could do -- a success would have made them simultaneously rich and famous. They failed. Any questions?
> As you implicitly acknowledge with your hypothesis of the "announcement effect" ...
"My hypothesis?" You need to learn something about equities. The announcement effect is very well-known.
Do you suppose I wrote all these articles, and talked a bunch of economists into believing in it? For God's sake.
> ... the null hypothesis is that Buffett beat the market.
The null hypothesis is that Buffett did not beat the market based on special skills. The null hypothesis is that Buffett's performance has a pedestrian explanation -- chance. That's what the null hypothesis means.
Quote: "In statistical inference of observed data of a scientific experiment, the null hypothesis refers to a general or default position: that there is no relationship between two measured phenomena, or that a potential medical treatment has no effect."
I can't repair the defects in your education in a series of forum posts -- you will just have to go out and get an education on your own, like a grown-up.
Nonsense. The announcement effect is a well-established distortion of the market:
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/announcment-effect.asp
> ... to your case.
My case? The fact that investment managers cannot produce results has been proven over and over again. It's not my case, it is a simple fact about reality. All you need to do is review the WSJ Dartboard Contest.
http://www.investorhome.com/darts.htm
In the Dartboard Contest, managers had every incentive to prove what they could do -- a success would have made them simultaneously rich and famous. They failed. Any questions?
> As you implicitly acknowledge with your hypothesis of the "announcement effect" ...
"My hypothesis?" You need to learn something about equities. The announcement effect is very well-known.
http://www.economicshelp.org/dictionary/a/announcement-effec...
Do you suppose I wrote all these articles, and talked a bunch of economists into believing in it? For God's sake.
> ... the null hypothesis is that Buffett beat the market.
The null hypothesis is that Buffett did not beat the market based on special skills. The null hypothesis is that Buffett's performance has a pedestrian explanation -- chance. That's what the null hypothesis means.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Null_hypothesis
Quote: "In statistical inference of observed data of a scientific experiment, the null hypothesis refers to a general or default position: that there is no relationship between two measured phenomena, or that a potential medical treatment has no effect."
I can't repair the defects in your education in a series of forum posts -- you will just have to go out and get an education on your own, like a grown-up.