The Motley Fool Discussion Boards
Investing/Strategies / Retirement Investing
|Subject: Re: Roth VS Traditional||Date: 7/9/2004 11:06 AM|
|Author: PosFCF||Number: 41521 of 77293|
I was careful in my response to the original poster to frame my answer such that it was clearly only applicable to me. I was also clear to state that if anyone else were to use good performance results as part of their reason, that they had to have already established for themselves that their investment selection process produced superior results for them.
I always challenge those who claim to have "above average performance results" to post their performance beating investments on this or another board ahead of time, so that we may see them in action. No one takes me up on it though.
I don't usually post my trades on any board because it's not about the trade, it's about the selection process, methodology and thought behind it. Investment selections and their results are highly individualized. While basic principles may be common to the highly successful, each blends those principles into their own unique style.
In 2003 on the Foolish Collective, I participated in their FunPort bit of a learning contest. If you care to review those results, perhaps you won't spout off so freely with people you don't know. I know, one year does not a lifetime make, and the past is no predictor of the future. However, this is a case where trades were publicly posted ahead of time.
Additionally, on that thread, I do occasionally mention companies that I've researched and selected and a brief reasoning as to why.
No one takes me up on it though.
Any other absolutes?
|Copyright 1996-2015 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us|