4 ms·
Not at all a bad take. The PE model has only existed during the ~40 year period that were an extreme outlier in terms of bond performance, liquidity, and equity
by anm89 4y ago
Not at all a bad take. The PE model has only existed during the ~40 year period that were an extreme outlier in terms of bond performance, liquidity, and equity return averages. They've never had to suffer a tail event that wasn't papered over with cheap money, even though we know historically that the papering over of business cycles is not a game that can last indefinitely.
Demanding "data" from other people without explaining why that person has the burden of proof to produce data for something they have already explained while the requester has simultaneously also provided no data on anything is one of the laziest and lowest value takes that frequently gets repeated on here.
- oneoff786 4y agoMy claim is that if you don’t have data showing that PE doesn’t tend to deliver on its valuations then it’s probably not justified to attack them for not updating their valuations. Adjusting for market conditions may not be a good model. I don’t know this to be true, but I feel like I’m claiming the null hypothesis here. That it’s not determinable. PE held companies are not liquid and undergo significant changes.