I thought he was referring to the old perfect information canard in misreadings of Adam Smith. Thanks. EDIT: I actually don't believe in that hypothesis, eit

I thought he was referring to the old perfect information canard in misreadings of Adam Smith. Thanks. EDIT: I actually don't believe in that hypothesis, either :) I think stock prices are more reflective of crowd dynamics and emergent properties of the various algos (what % are computer driven, now?) than it is by actual prospects of the business in question. Tech stocks are a great example, I see them get pummeled or inflated for terrible reasons on the few occasions I look at market prices. So I think it's eminently beatable, both in an algorithmic and in a Buffet-fundamentals sense, I just think that anyone who beats it will naturally raise their management fees by just as much.