[rohry]

"Over the years from time to time I would look at their listing and the last I remember seeing it, it was at around $2-3, forty years later...."

Of course that fact doesn't mean that there wasn't a period of time where that company was a good investment. I bet if you check the stock price for them in January of 1980, for example, there would have been a pretty good runup. Your advisor was probably right for 14-15 years.

Stock prices from the mid 60's to 1982 were flat but that didn't mean that there would never be a reason to invest in them in 1983 or 1985. Witness 1983-2000.

A good investor follows Ecclesiastes 3:1...
To everything there is a season
and a time for every matter
or purpose under heaven.

[Mugwumps]

Stock prices from the mid 60's to 1982 were flat but that didn't mean that there would never be a reason to invest in them in 1983 or 1985. Witness 1983-2000.

A good investor follows Ecclesiastes 3:1... To everything there is a season and a time for every matter or purpose under heaven.

True. Which is why 'buy and hold' as the 'only' strategy never made sense to me. It's not logical. Especially when you look at the charts that show not only 'how much you would miss if you were out of the market on the top 10 good days' but that also show 'how much you would have preserved had you avoided the 10 worst days.'

I feel for the folks who put all their faith in 'buy and hold' and haven't moved to cash. A lot of dear people are being slowly but surely wiped out. These accounting scandals (long expected, now revealed) are serious - and systemic in many situations. They change the equation.