With regard to the #3 "rule modification"...
I guess I can sort of understand the urge to KIK-proof future PSL contests, however I can't understand why rational thought wouldn't quickly suppress that urge in the interest of getting new ideas out to the VMC gang.
Let's looks at some past PSL stats:
Len, you say you're in search of realistic results and that DanLC and my PSL5 numbers are not. In PSL 2, no fewer than 3 contestants had returns over 100% --- it seems the over/under for realism is 150%?!
Further, I've eye-balled the top performing stocks for the first 4 PSLs and found what I believe are at least eight examples of stocks that returned over 120% each, but would have failed the new $5000 or bust rule. Consequently those symbols would not been allowed in initial portfolios and PSL contestants would not have been able to DD them on their own and made some serious $$$$. How is the contest improved when less ideas will be allowed to be put forth?
Len, you wrote in post #1298 that "It is our intention to mimic, with as much accuracy as possible, the real world trading during any 15 week period for the average VMC'er." In post #1301, SSK wrote "VMC PSL Contests were never attended [sic] to mirror a person's portfolio..." Are you guys on the same page?
Also in #1301, SSK succinctly captures what I thought the PSLs were all about, namely to "(1) Give us (VMC) a fun time. (2) Give us a place to look for investing ideas..." PSL will definitely be less fun for me than prior PSLs, and there will indisputebly be less investing ideas in the initial portfolios.
When it comes to P/Es, 7 is the new 14...
