What do you think is true, that most everyone believe the opposite?

[ni-co]

I'll add another one: macro predictions on this board are pretty much a reflection of what happened the past 12 months.

 

Oh really? There is quite a long thread on deflation hedges that started back in December 2014. I encourage you to take a look at the first few posts.

[writser]

I'll add another one: macro predictions on this board are pretty much a reflection of what happened the past 12 months.

 

Oh really? There is quite a long thread on deflation hedges that started back in December 2014. I encourage you to take a look at the first few posts.

 

That thread pretty much proves my point. It was opened in december 2014 when oil prices where down ~40% year-on-year and the GSCI index was down ~30%.

[TwoCitiesCapital]

I'll add another one: macro predictions on this board are pretty much a reflection of what happened the past 12 months.

 

Oh really? There is quite a long thread on deflation hedges that started back in December 2014. I encourage you to take a look at the first few posts.

 

That thread pretty much proves my point. It was opened in december 2014 when oil prices where down ~40% year-on-year and the GSCI index was down ~30%.

 

There's been a few on here supportive of the  deflationary thesis long before there was a market sell-off in oil - though there were some bandwagoners after oil's decline. What's important to see is that oil is down another 50% from late 2014, other commodities have continued to fall, the trend in headline inflation figures and long-term interest rates for most of the developed world continues to be downward, and still everyone thinks deflation is a pipe dream and that equity markets offer good value. It's hard for me to buy that this thread's macro predictions reflect the last 12 months when most people seem to be bullish and accumulating and are very critical of Fairfax's equity hedges and deflation bets.

 

I was just out of high school in 2007 so I am not very familiar with the complex financial events of the day, but it does seem similar to 2007 where the mortgage market was clearly falling apart and CDS prices continued to move against the buyers. It seems like every year is a confirmation of the deflationary threat and yet prices for the swaps continue to move in the wrong direction.

 

[Guest 50centdollars]

That falling oil prices is good for America or commodities for that matter. Cheap commodities will be a tailwind for the US consumer. In fact, the pain of China will be good too as prices for the crap that the US imports from there will go down. How does making things cheaper for the US consumer cause a recession?

[Guest Schwab711]

Earnings volatility matters [a lot] in valuation

 

Business models can be at least partially quantified

 

"'It's far better to buy a wonderful company at a fair price than a fair company at a wonderful price." implies Buffett thinks this will consistently provide alpha if you can find wonderful companies.

 

It's possible to find wonderful companies

 

Wonderful companies do not change status very often and they are exceedingly rare

[TwoCitiesCapital]

That falling oil prices is good for America or commodities for that matter. Cheap commodities will be a tailwind for the US consumer. In fact, the pain of China will be good too as prices for the crap that the US imports from there will go down. How does making things cheaper for the US consumer cause a recession?

 

Yes. Let's discuss what happened last time housing got cheaper by 50%...

 

Falling prices don't always hurt the economy and they certainly don't always help. If they fall due to efficiency gains - it's good. If they fall due to oversupply, malinvestment, or a deleveraging consumer, it's a bad thing.

[Cevian]

There are much higher returns in purchasing, owning, operating private businesses than investing in the stock market. The main surprise to me when attending Berkshire and Fairfax meetings is how many people just want to talk about stock market investing as opposed to owning and operating actual businesses outright.

 

Not sure if it is laziness, ignorance, hubris or fear but never understood why more value investors don't practice the value investing and management principles in investing and operating private businesses.

 

Cevian,

 

Do you speak from experience?  Can you elaborate?

 

The only "experience" I have pertaining to this is a friend of mine has looked at private businesses and has not come across anything even remotely interesting.  As he digs into the businesses he has found numerous issues regarding mismanagement, accounting issues, employee issues. 

 

Thanks,

 

AtlCDore

 

Yes personal experience. I don't mean they are mutually exclusive (i.e. stock market OR private business). We also own stocks. In my opinion all asset classes should be up for grabs for value investors and not restricted solely to tradable securities on public markets. Seth Klarman's book had a big impact on my thinking in my 20s, after having converted to value investing in my late teens. I had a Bruce Lee "Jeet Kune Do" moment where I came to realize that value investing and the concept of Margin of Safety can be successfully applied not only to stocks but to private businesses, cars, real estate, land, and a lot of times with much higher returns than just stocks.

 

Having said that, this doesn't mean it's easy. I love it though and find it more fun and a challenge to see the impact your own direct decisions and management/leadership can make.

 

I attend the Fairfax meetings every year and would love to have a discussion of these types of opportunities.

[ni-co]

I'll add another one: macro predictions on this board are pretty much a reflection of what happened the past 12 months.

 

Oh really? There is quite a long thread on deflation hedges that started back in December 2014. I encourage you to take a look at the first few posts.

 

That thread pretty much proves my point. It was opened in december 2014 when oil prices where down ~40% year-on-year and the GSCI index was down ~30%.

 

I don't think that's the point. Of course you need real-world developments to base a macro thesis on them. The decisive question is how did people think about the oil price drop back then?

 

I give you another quote:

 

Leaving aside the impact on single stocks for a moment,  this decline doesn't make me bullish at all for the world economy. First and foremost I think of deflation spreading to the U.S. depending on how China develops. If China's financial crisis expands there seems to be quite a risk for a deflationary spiral developing.

 

I'm not doing this to brag but to underline my point that thinking about macro can be very useful for investment decisions. At the time I was, like many others on this board, thinking about oil companies and whether they presented good values. I didn't touch any of them and sold my ZINC and BAC positions purely out of macro reasoning. I liked the ideas but they wouldn't work in a deflationary environment.

[Jurgis]

I give you another quote:

 

Leaving aside the impact on single stocks for a moment,  this decline doesn't make me bullish at all for the world economy. First and foremost I think of deflation spreading to the U.S. depending on how China develops. If China's financial crisis expands there seems to be quite a risk for a deflationary spiral developing.

 

This is a great example of macro prediction that Tetlock disembowels in "Superforecasting".

 

First of all, no time frame is given.

Second, it's all "if this then that maybe" vague pontification.

Third, it's not even come true, but the author claims it has.

Fourth, if it won't come true, author will say "but I said ifffff".

Fifth, it is cherry picked out of a long list of author's prognostications by using Monday morning quarterbacking and selective memory. There is zero accountability for any of the predictions, and zero evaluation of how many of them worked out and how many didn't.

[ni-co]

Of course it's always with a big fat if! Do you expect me to be the god of global macro? Oh, how rich were I if I knew this stuff in advance and the timeframe on top of that! Everything – everything – is a matter of probabilities. I suppose you don't expect 100% certainties and timeframes when buying value stocks, do you?

 

Author didn't buy any energy stock and sold commodity stocks. Show me a single post where I didn't operate under the deflation hypothesis. You won't find anything because that's what I've been doing for 1.5 years now.

 

Btw. I chose my quote because I remembered it. There are many others on this board who were earlier or more prescient with this thesis. As I said, my point was not to brag but to show that macro can be a useful tool for value investors, too.

[Jurgis]

Of course it's always with a big fat if! Do you expect me to be the god of global macro?

 

I expect accountability. Show me Brier score way above average, I'll be impressed. Otherwise, no.

 

BTW, to be fair, this also applies to non-macro calls by people. There's a lot of the same issues in stock discussions too. The calls about future are made in a rather vague way, then reinterpreted, then forgotten, then different calls are made without acknowledging that the previous call was wrong, etc.

 

Of course, you could argue that CoBF is just a fun forum to exchange friendly banter and nobody should be precise and accountable. And posters investing results (which are not published anyway) are what matters, so who cares if their calls/arguments/opinions/whatever were wrong. As long as they did well in their portfolios. This makes some sense, but I think we lose some potential of the community.

 

I would prefer to listen to people whose macro/micro/company specific/economy/politics/whatever Brier scores are out there rather than try to remember how many times concrete poster was wrong/vague/etc.

 

To pick on you again: apart from couple of months in Europe (I believe), you have been wrong on deflation so far. So why should your future performance be better? Now, if you made a precise, evaluated calls ( for example, "oil will fall below $40 in 6 months" ) in the past and they were shown to be right, you'd have a good Brier score and your future precise calls might be more interesting.

 

Anyway, just my opinion and all that. Take care.

[Jurgis]

There are many others on this board who were earlier or more prescient with this thesis.

 

What thesis? Deflation thesis? Which so far has been wrong? A wrong thesis is something to brag about?

 

You have an interesting world view I must say.

[Sharad]

I give you another quote:

 

Leaving aside the impact on single stocks for a moment,  this decline doesn't make me bullish at all for the world economy. First and foremost I think of deflation spreading to the U.S. depending on how China develops. If China's financial crisis expands there seems to be quite a risk for a deflationary spiral developing.

 

This is a great example of macro prediction that Tetlock disembowels in "Superforecasting".

 

First of all, no time frame is given.

Second, it's all "if this then that maybe" vague pontification.

Third, it's not even come true, but the author claims it has.

Fourth, if it won't come true, author will say "but I said ifffff".

Fifth, it is cherry picked out of a long list of author's prognostications by using Monday morning quarterbacking and selective memory. There is zero accountability for any of the predictions, and zero evaluation of how many of them worked out and how many didn't.

 

Since this is all in good fun, I'll play ball Jurgis:

 

1. S&P 500 falls to slightly below 1,700, and bottoms in the 1,660-1,700 range in the next 6 months. Should the market fall below that, expect a retest of the 1,550 tops of 2000 and 2007.

2. The Canadian dollar although in freefall, bottoms around $0.665 against the USD. This happens in the next 12 months. I'm a Canuck, so I follow CAD-USD closely.

3. Even if the Federal Reserve raises rates again this year, it reverses course before the end of 2017. Rates go negative within 3 years, as all other options are exhausted, and all other developed economies continue to lower their rates creating the importation of deflation in the U.S. The rate declines in other countries fail as well, as deep credit contraction will pressure countries.

4. Gold rises to 1,200 as the fear trade creates a little rally in the yellow metal. However, before the year is done, gold also peaks, and resumes its decline.

5. Oil bottoms this year in the $23-25 range. It does not rally, but just sits there, as the global GDP growth rate falls to the 1% mark.

 

I'm just saying this all in fun, but I am thinking in these terms and trying (failing in my attempt?) to position my portolio against the above forecasts...I should also add, I'm not sure I care if I'm right or wrong overall. I don't manage other people's money, and I hedge my portfolio, and attempt to get a positive return each and every year. Since it's my money and not others, I treat my portfolio like a family member, and try to do no harm to it.

[james22]

What thesis? Deflation thesis? Which so far has been wrong?

 

As one of the few who anticipated both the 2000-2002 and 2007-2009 collapses (and having shifted in 2003 to a constructive outlook in-between), what I thought the film [The Big Short] particularly got right was just how excruciating the wait was before the crisis unfolded, even for those who expected it (see, for example, my November 2007 weekly comment Critical Point).

 

Though I don’t take leveraged positions in credit default swaps, or sell bank stocks short, even refusing to take equity market risk in the later stages of that bubble was excruciating enough.

 

One had to suffer fools parroting things like “being early is the same thing as being wrong” until the collapse demonstrated that, actually no, it’s really not. The 2007-2009 collapse wiped out the entire total return of the S&P 500, in excess of risk-free Treasury bills, all the way back to June 1995.

 

http://www.hussmanfunds.com/wmc/wmc160104.htm

[Jurgis]

Since this is all in good fun, I'll play ball Jurgis:

 

1. S&P 500 falls to slightly below 1,700, and bottoms in the 1,660-1,700 range in the next 6 months. Should the market fall below that, expect a retest of the 1,550 tops of 2000 and 2007.

2. The Canadian dollar although in freefall, bottoms around $0.665 against the USD. This happens in the next 12 months. I'm a Canuck, so I follow CAD-USD closely.

3. Even if the Federal Reserve raises rates again this year, it reverses course before the end of 2017. Rates go negative within 3 years, as all other options are exhausted, and all other developed economies continue to lower their rates creating the importation of deflation in the U.S. The rate declines in other countries fail as well, as deep credit contraction will pressure countries.

4. Gold rises to 1,200 as the fear trade creates a little rally in the yellow metal. However, before the year is done, gold also peaks, and resumes its decline.

5. Oil bottoms this year in the $23-25 range. It does not rally, but just sits there, as the global GDP growth rate falls to the 1% mark.

 

Since this is all in good fun, let me show the issues with your predictions:

 

1. S&P 500 falls to slightly below 1,700, and bottoms in the 1,660-1,700 range in the next 6 months. - great, apart from the "bottoms" part. Not clear what you mean by "bottoms".

 

Should the market fall below that, expect a retest of the 1,550 tops of 2000 and 2007 - if this, then that is not a prediction. "retest" is not a prediction.

 

2. The Canadian dollar although in freefall, bottoms around $0.665 against the USD. This happens in the next 12 months. I'm a Canuck, so I follow CAD-USD closely. - this would be great, but "bottoms around" is not a prediction. This could be fixed by saying that CAD does not go lower than 0.665 against USD in next 12 months.

 

3. Even if the Federal Reserve raises rates again this year, it reverses course before the end of 2017. - if/then is not a prediction

 

Rates go negative within 3 years, - US rates? Which rates?

 

as all other options are exhausted, and all other developed economies continue to lower their rates creating the importation of deflation in the U.S. The rate declines in other countries fail as well, as deep credit contraction will pressure countries. - this is not a prediction.

 

4. Gold rises to 1,200 as the fear trade creates a little rally in the yellow metal. - what is time frame? In 2016?

 

However, before the year is done, gold also peaks, and resumes its decline. - this is not a prediction.

 

5. Oil bottoms this year in the $23-25 range. - What do you mean by "bottoms"? Does it go to below $25? Or are you trying to say "Oil does not go below $23 in 2016"?

 

It does not rally, but just sits there, - this is not a prediction.

 

as the global GDP growth rate falls to the 1% mark.  - This is quite imprecise. Let's try to make it more so. "Global GDP growth rate for 2016 is less than 1% based on ... IMF 2016 report? some other stat?"

 

;)

[Jurgis]

What thesis? Deflation thesis? Which so far has been wrong?

 

As one of the few who anticipated both the 2000-2002 and 2007-2009 collapses (and having shifted in 2003 to a constructive outlook in-between), what I thought the film [The Big Short] particularly got right was just how excruciating the wait was before the crisis unfolded, even for those who expected it (see, for example, my November 2007 weekly comment Critical Point).

 

Though I don’t take leveraged positions in credit default swaps, or sell bank stocks short, even refusing to take equity market risk in the later stages of that bubble was excruciating enough.

 

One had to suffer fools parroting things like “being early is the same thing as being wrong” until the collapse demonstrated that, actually no, it’s really not. The 2007-2009 collapse wiped out the entire total return of the S&P 500, in excess of risk-free Treasury bills, all the way back to June 1995.

 

http://www.hussmanfunds.com/wmc/wmc160104.htm

 

LOL. Yes, people rationalize their positions in a lot of ways. This is classic.

 

Edit: Here are the returns of Mr. Great Predictor of Market Collapses:

 

http://www.hussmanfunds.com/theFunds.html

 

Average Annual Total Returns

for periods ended

12/31/15

1 Year -8.40%

3 Year -7.84%

5 Year -7.01%

10 Year -3.67%

Since

Inception

(07/24/00)

 

2.25%

 

I will take SP500 any day of the week.

[Sharad]

What thesis? Deflation thesis? Which so far has been wrong?

 

As one of the few who anticipated both the 2000-2002 and 2007-2009 collapses (and having shifted in 2003 to a constructive outlook in-between), what I thought the film [The Big Short] particularly got right was just how excruciating the wait was before the crisis unfolded, even for those who expected it (see, for example, my November 2007 weekly comment Critical Point).

 

Though I don’t take leveraged positions in credit default swaps, or sell bank stocks short, even refusing to take equity market risk in the later stages of that bubble was excruciating enough.

 

One had to suffer fools parroting things like “being early is the same thing as being wrong” until the collapse demonstrated that, actually no, it’s really not. The 2007-2009 collapse wiped out the entire total return of the S&P 500, in excess of risk-free Treasury bills, all the way back to June 1995.

 

http://www.hussmanfunds.com/wmc/wmc160104.htm

 

Hussman never was bullish after the 2009 bottom (here is his March 2009 newsletter http://www.hussmanfunds.com/wmc/wmc090309.htm and his November 9, 2009 newsletter http://www.hussmanfunds.com/wmc/wmc091109.htm). I don't think he ever changed his tune. Hussman isn't early because he was never bullish. Now, if the market falters, he'll be hailed an Oracle yet again, but he'll have permanently lost many of his investors' money because they redeemed, and those left holding the bag are left with lower quality assets that remain after those redemptions. Sorry, Hussman's facts and figures all appear to be correct, but investor sentiment and the flood of money that was pushed through the economic system had to go somewhere, and that wasn't in consumer spending. It shored up broken balance sheets for consumers, corporations and even many governments. You can keep pushing that button, but once you stop, the music usually stops soon after. We may finally be at that point, but regulators will likely find a way to save the economic system from complete disaster.

[Jurgis]

To be fair: investing is not a prediction. That's what Hussman tries to say, but then he fails on investing - and probably on predictions too.

 

Or at least investing is not just a prediction. You can be wrong with your predictions (a lot) and yet position yourself so that the outcome of your predictions does not matter (much). Buffett does this when he predicts high inflation for the last 20+ years (I think), but positions himself that his prediction failure does not hurt him at all. That in a sense is the ultimate "margin of safety" or "heads I win, tails I don't lose much". Of course, people abuse these and apply them to situations which are anything but.

 

I still think that separating the predictions out of your investment thesis is useful. And clearly predictions are key if you invest in prediction-heavy targets (such as junior oil&gas E&Ps, for example). Anyway, this is interesting thing to think about.

[Sharad]

Since this is all in good fun, I'll play ball Jurgis:

 

1. S&P 500 falls to slightly below 1,700, and bottoms in the 1,660-1,700 range in the next 6 months. Should the market fall below that, expect a retest of the 1,550 tops of 2000 and 2007.

2. The Canadian dollar although in freefall, bottoms around $0.665 against the USD. This happens in the next 12 months. I'm a Canuck, so I follow CAD-USD closely.

3. Even if the Federal Reserve raises rates again this year, it reverses course before the end of 2017. Rates go negative within 3 years, as all other options are exhausted, and all other developed economies continue to lower their rates creating the importation of deflation in the U.S. The rate declines in other countries fail as well, as deep credit contraction will pressure countries.

4. Gold rises to 1,200 as the fear trade creates a little rally in the yellow metal. However, before the year is done, gold also peaks, and resumes its decline.

5. Oil bottoms this year in the $23-25 range. It does not rally, but just sits there, as the global GDP growth rate falls to the 1% mark.

 

Since this is all in good fun, let me show the issues with your predictions:

 

1. S&P 500 falls to slightly below 1,700, and bottoms in the 1,660-1,700 range in the next 6 months. - great, apart from the "bottoms" part. Not clear what you mean by "bottoms".

 

Should the market fall below that, expect a retest of the 1,550 tops of 2000 and 2007 - if this, then that is not a prediction. "retest" is not a prediction.

 

2. The Canadian dollar although in freefall, bottoms around $0.665 against the USD. This happens in the next 12 months. I'm a Canuck, so I follow CAD-USD closely. - this would be great, but "bottoms around" is not a prediction. This could be fixed by saying that CAD does not go lower than 0.665 against USD in next 12 months.

 

3. Even if the Federal Reserve raises rates again this year, it reverses course before the end of 2017. - if/then is not a prediction

 

Rates go negative within 3 years, - US rates? Which rates?

 

as all other options are exhausted, and all other developed economies continue to lower their rates creating the importation of deflation in the U.S. The rate declines in other countries fail as well, as deep credit contraction will pressure countries. - this is not a prediction.

 

4. Gold rises to 1,200 as the fear trade creates a little rally in the yellow metal. - what is time frame? In 2016?

 

However, before the year is done, gold also peaks, and resumes its decline. - this is not a prediction.

 

5. Oil bottoms this year in the $23-25 range. - What do you mean by "bottoms"? Does it go to below $25? Or are you trying to say "Oil does not go below $23 in 2016"?

 

It does not rally, but just sits there, - this is not a prediction.

 

as the global GDP growth rate falls to the 1% mark.  - This is quite imprecise. Let's try to make it more so. "Global GDP growth rate for 2016 is less than 1% based on ... IMF 2016 report? some other stat?"

 

;)

 

I'll try to be more clear next time. And no, I won't be able to give exact numbers in many cases. Sometimes ranges are all we can give. As an example, I'll state "Brent oil will fall below $25, but will not fall beyond $23 in 2016"...thanks for the comments Jurgis. With respect to equities, I will say this: I will close my hedged short plays at 1,700, but I won't be running to go all in on the long side then. I think the S&P 500 falls to 1,667 based on a retracement of the trough to peak rally we experienced. Investor sentiment pushes valuations to extreme levels both on the greed and fear side, so I likely am wrong on where we fall. But this is where I see the market going. If it falls further than 1,667, I will consider myself wrong on my prediction of how far the S&P falls in 2016. If the S&P 500 falls to 1,550, I will have been completely wrong on my prediction.

[ni-co]

Of course it's always with a big fat if! Do you expect me to be the god of global macro?

 

I expect accountability. Show me Brier score way above average, I'll be impressed. Otherwise, no.

 

To pick on you again: apart from couple of months in Europe (I believe), you have been wrong on deflation so far. So why should your future performance be better? Now, if you made a precise, evaluated calls ( for example, "oil will fall below $40 in 6 months" ) in the past and they were shown to be right, you'd have a good Brier score and your future precise calls might be more interesting.

 

Wow, you have some really high standards.

 

I never said that it has already happened but I think that it's in the process of happening. Wrong? Maybe. Let's wait and see. My point is that this perspective helped me stay out of trouble. It doesn't really matter whether the environment is one of outright deflation (which I grant you we haven't had much of) or disinflation, which we've been having everywhere.

 

Anyway, you seem to enjoy turning reasonable discussions into polemic arguments. This is not going to happen here. Take care, too.

 

Ps: I don't even know what a Brier score is but I somehow have the feeling that it doesn't matter anyway.

[james22]

...you have been wrong on deflation so far. So why should your future performance be better?

 

You believe being early is the same thing as being wrong, Jurgis?

 

Hussman's point: "actually no, it’s really not."

 

Or at least, it wasn't then. Let's wait and see.

 

 

(I was right on tech in the 90s. Why has my performance since then been worse?)

[Jurgis]

...you have been wrong on deflation so far. So why should your future performance be better?

 

You believe being early is the same thing as being wrong, Jurgis?

 

Well if timeframe for prediction is not specified, it is just invalid prediction.

 

Hussman's point: "actually no, it’s really not."

 

It wouldn't be if he provided the time frame for his argument. And yet he - as most pundits - hides behind "it will happen at some point".

 

So if I tell you that KO will disappear as a company, you'll consider me a prophet even though I'll have to repeat (probably for couple decades) that "oh shucks, I'm early, but I'm not wrong"?

[james22]

...you have been wrong on deflation so far. So why should your future performance be better?

 

You believe being early is the same thing as being wrong, Jurgis?

 

Well if timeframe for prediction is not specified, it is just invalid prediction.

 

Hussman has always specified the time frame as the end of the market cycle.

 

Hussman's point: "actually no, it’s really not."

 

It wouldn't be if he provided the time frame for his argument. And yet he - as most pundits - hides behind "it will happen at some point".

 

Are not arguments demonstrated right or wrong at the end of market cycles?

 

Remember: The 2007-2009 collapse wiped out the entire total return of the S&P 500, in excess of risk-free Treasury bills, all the way back to June 1995.

 

 

So if I tell you that KO will disappear as a company, you'll consider me a prophet even though I'll have to repeat (probably for couple decades) that "oh shucks, I'm early, but I'm not wrong"?

 

If the collapse of KO will wipe out all its returns from today, sure.

 

But, hey, the end of the current market cycle will demonstrate Hussman right or wrong. He'll be considered an oracle if one would have done better following his advice than holding the S&P500 and not if one would have done worse.

 

Not much for him to hide behind.

[writser]

1. Predicting something will happen at "the end of the market cycle" is not a falsifiable statement. It means whatever you want it to mean. Market goes up? Sure, the cycle hasn't ended yet. Market goes down? I'm right, this is the end of the cycle.

 

2. I would reframe your closing statement as follows:

 

But, hey, the end of the current market cycle will demonstrate Hussman right or wrong. He'll be extremely rich and considered an oracle if one would have done better following his advice than holding the S&P500 and if not, his doomsaying got him on television and attracted billions of dollars of stupid money to his funds, making him insanely rich either way.

 

Not much for him to lose.

 

Always be skeptical of loud mouths. Especially if they're after your money. This guy is not properly incentivized to give you good market forecasts (this is apart from the fact that I think macro forecasting is **** anyway).

[Jurgis]

1. Predicting something will happen at "the end of the market cycle" is not a falsifiable statement. It means whatever you want it to mean. Market goes up? Sure, the cycle hasn't ended yet. Market goes down? I'm right, this is the end of the cycle.

 

Exactly.