Well, I'll go back lurking here in a minute, but three points.1) Price at the entry point DOES matter. No argument there. But there are ways to mitigate that situation such as dollar cost averaging or better, value averaging IF you're looking at an allocation to any stock. People talk about the "lost decade" from 2000 to 2010, BUT if you'd DCA'd into that period you'd have found that there were more down months than up months, so your price basis would have have been lower overall than one hit on the highest day in 2000. 2) To Berkshire's point (and Mungofitch at their forum is great), the intrinsic value has continued to increase all during that period. All stocks will go from "hot" to "cold" and back again, and it's very difficult to guage when market sentiment will turn. BUT, when basic intrinsic value rises at annualized rates from 8-12% or more, that makes the choice a good one UNLESS you're betting on the short term (and depending on the term you may move from an investor to a trader).I admit that I'm in the camp that Berkshire is a screaming value now, but that is NO guarantee that it will only rise from here.3) The buy and hold discussion is a longer one that includes temperment, discipline, time, cost and real return. Buy and hold IS, IMO, the guage against any other decision should be measured.Hockeypop
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Ra