Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Does this mean that the 1960s were not fantastic times for the biggest multinational companies, but rather good democratic times for mid-size companies? How much does the 1990s growth reflect the increased participation of pension funds? If large institutional investors tend to bet on "super" super-companies of the DJIA list, that may explain its "better" peak performance.

In this crisis, many people need more money, but a lot of money are wondering without a purpose. Somehow the financial system is not moving money from points A where it is to points B where it is needed (contrary to what one Rothschild likes to say). Instead, aimless money is making problems of its own.

by das monde on Mon Aug 24th, 2009 at 07:04:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It only means that the components were not updated enough in this period:


Updates in 1939, 56, 59, 76: it sucks...
Then 3 updates in the 80's, 3 in the 90's
And of course, already 5 updates in this decades, and counting...

In the 80-90, all stocks were free-riding the secular trend of retirement funds going for a gambit. But in most cases, their target benchmark was very broad, at least S&P500 or Russell2000


by Pierre on Mon Aug 24th, 2009 at 10:42:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]


Top Diaries

Occasional Series