----- Original Message ----- From: "Fred Foldvary" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: 03 August 2002 14:27 PM Subject: Re: efficient markets ...
> > As a mathematician, I think the whole notion of efficient markets is very > > non-transparent, bordering on meaningless or do I mean contextless? > > The first question that would need to be answered to prove me wrong is to > > explain what time-span (transactional or relationship) governs your model. > > You cannot have both, because they ultimately spin all the results of > > economic modelling very differently > > chris macrae > > A purely efficient market would always be efficient, therefore for all time > intervals. I don't understand the meaning of "You cannot have both". > I would like to suggest to you that there are 2 poles of corporate performance which are often opposite: -a company's last 90 day's performance as a transaction-taker -a company's performance as a sustainable system for relationship-making Let's assume we have honest bean counting for the last 90 days. It is still the case that as people in business units squeeze what they can get out of transactional performance (they may over-sell what after-service can deliver; they may cut training; they may...) the more they put the health of relationship system -and all the human energies that implies - at risk. I would suggest to you that whilst you have monopoly auditing of transactioned numbers (even assuming these have been counted properly) almost all information on the relationship strength of the system isnt getting transparent attention (or if it is getting any its only from by insiders). Whilst this fundamental contextual bias in "what corporate performance is defined to be" rules, the chances of markets being efficient dwindles absolutely below zero. chris macrae [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.valuetrue.com Transparency Community
