The Motley Fool Discussion Boards

Previous Page

Investing Books / Rule Breakers, Rule Makers


Subject:  Re: Boston Globe rips RB-RM Date:  7/6/1999  9:24 PM
Author:  irbyj Number:  162 of 265

The one nugget of insight I got from the Globe's review is that RB-RM should have put more emphasis on how the RB-RM criteria would have ruled out apparent RB-RM companies from the past that went on to disappoint, return-wise.

As I read the book, I kept wishing there were a way to back-test the strategies. It just can't be done honestly, because as somebody famous once said "The victors write the history books" (Meaning, the Microsofts and Intels tend to get the lion's share of scrutiny in the backwards-looking press precisely because they are so dominant now.)

I guess we could try to evaluate future RM companies versus their competition using only facts and data WIDELY KNOWN AT THE TIME, but with such subjective selection criteria, who among us could be totally blind to the "future" (which to us in 1999 is the past)?

Still, I agree, it was a poorly written review. Lazy might be a better word.
Copyright 1996-2021 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us