As a subscriber to Gillen Markets newsletter\website there is more than just general market commentary. There is analysis of various stocks, investment trusts, ETFs etc and various investment approaches, suggestions on buys\sells etc.I get the idea that it's a questionable pursuit trying to time the market and that markets are a random walk and all that. What I don't get is someone selling a market commentary service restricting such commentary to saying that important current events are unlikely to have significant long-term implications. If this is true and possibly it is, then why the heck do you provide a market commentary service in the first place?
That's exactly my point. If their view is that investing is about the long term and this stuff doesn't matter in the long-term, why invest energy in activities (the weekly market commentary) than simply distract from (and possibly hinder) the core message?I suppose Gillen Markets can answer for themselves but seems they are saying long term these events don't matter much. Short term they do, so I suppose that's why they comment on the market on their weekly newsletter.
They would not be well diversified portfolios because of their geographical concentration.While comparing brexit to the russian revolution is certainly over the top, things indeed do happen.
A well diversified portfolio in St Petersburg, Shanghai, and Berlin were all wiped out in the 20th century.
The idea that a "diversified investment portfolio has always done fine through whatever nastiness the world throws up" is only true if you confine your attention to those parts of the world that have not undergone a seismic shift in the basis of their legal and economic systems.
Brexit by itself is a seminal event to quote S&P, the political turmoil that seems to be engulfing the UK, may pass but it may do considerable damage before it does.
The effects of Brexit may be felt well beyond Britain. And if Trump is elected the effects will be felt around the world.They would not be well diversified portfolios because of their geographical concentration.
A well diversified portfolio has always done fine in the medium to long term.
Brendan, the article I put out aimed to make a simple point. We all make investment decisions in different ways. Buffett never takes politics or the economic variables into account. Given his record, few will argue with that and his approach works for us (not that we are Buffett, far from it, in fact). Rather, everyone needs a framework for making decisions if just to assist in keeping emotions out of it. Our way is to understand the specific risks that we can control in stocks and funds we research and recommend. And I provided three examples of that thinking in the article so that it was useful in a practical way. Some may not agree with our investment process, and that's fine. We are all different. But the key point is whether we offer a sensible way to making decisions and whether we are independent in our views. If a reader thinks so, we may end up with a new subscriber to our website (and we are always looking for new subscribers) or an investment client. My Featured Articles are a way for us to promote ourselves. After all, we have Ireland's only (fully regulated) investment newsletter.So it is a good article?
I am very confused now.