[Search for users]
[Overall Top Noters]
[List of all Conferences]
[Download this site]
| Title: | Market Investing |
|
| Moderator: | 2155::michaud |
|
| Created: | Thu Jan 23 1992 |
| Last Modified: | Thu Jun 05 1997 |
| Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Number of topics: | 1060 |
| Total number of notes: | 10477 |
1000.0. "Best Single Long Term Investment Vehicle" by 2155::michaud (Jeff Michaud - ObjectBroker) Sat Apr 20 1996 01:13
Well searching for topics with "stock", "bond", "long", or
"return" in the title didn't reveal an existing topic that
I could find for this topic (though I'm sure we've discussed it
before, but probably hidden under some other title).
On Wall St. Week tonight (Friday) the guest computed (just
for W$W they said :-) the comparitive returns of various
investment choices
The following assumes a theoritical $1 invested in 1802 in each
of the various investments (CPI is the Consumer Price Index, ie.
the usual method of tracking inflation), and any payouts reinvested:
Total Nominal Returns (1802-1995)
Stocks $4,558,397.53
Bonds $9,557.42
T-Bills $3,324.84
Gold $15.54
CPI 1272%
Taking the effects of inflation the real returns computed are:
Total Real Returns (1802-1995)
Stocks $358,448.39
Bonds $751.54
T-Bills $261.45
Gold $1.22
| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 1000.1 | "If it don't go up, don't buy it" -- M. Twain | EVMS::HALLYB | Fish have no concept of fire | Mon Apr 22 1996 09:17 | 21 |
| Pity they didn't explain how they calculated those figures.
THERE'S NO POINT IN PRESENTING RETURNS THAT COULD NOT BE OBTAINED
BY ACTUAL INVESTORS.
I'll bet you can't find very many stocks that were around in 1802
that are still around in 1995. I guess W$W opposes buy-and-hold.
Wonder if they accounted for commissions? Taxes? Wonder if anybody
could have -really- obtained those returns? Maybe they should insert
the 1804 silver dollar (14 minted). If you had bought one of those
in 1804 you would have outperformed stocks 2-1.
I'll bet if you invested $1 in EVERY company that was around in 1802,
you'd be under water today.
Heck, $1 invested in Tokyo real estate in 1802 would probably outperform
stocks by a wide margin.
Until there's a good explanation for these figures, I figure they're
just blowing smoke.
John
|
| 1000.2 | | 2155::michaud | Jeff Michaud - ObjectBroker | Mon Apr 22 1996 10:24 | 9 |
| > Until there's a good explanation for these figures, I figure they're
> just blowing smoke.
It's not "they", but "one" person, the guest for the week.
However now I can't remember his name :-( Anyone else
in here see the show?
Yes, the details are lacking. I do prefer the guests that
give more recent picks than 100 year old picks :-)
|
| 1000.3 | WSW Guest 4/20 | CONSLT::BAGLEY | | Mon Apr 22 1996 16:12 | 2 |
| He is a business professor from the Wharton School who wrote a best
seller last year on stocks.
|