I think it helps to have some longer term context.

When you have stocks run up for a long period of time, it's because of tremendous earnings growth. Yes, Apple trades at 9x earnings but their growth has been astronomical over the past 5 years and the stock accordingly. At some point, the law of large numbers takes over.

Tell me one large cap mutual fund that doesnt own Apple. How many people own at least 1, if not multiple Apple products. The iPhones have been so great, does everyone need to upgrade? The ipad is probably dead - schools are now using chromebooks. And China may forego the brand as their economy slows down and go with a cheaper option as their own technology improves. These are real risks.

Disney's ESPN is an abomination. The stock trades at 18x earnings but once again, that stock has had a huge run up. Remember only a few years ago it was at less than $50/share. ESPN represents a substantial part of their earnings - more so than Star Wars or the parks. They so overpaid for their ridiculous sports rights that theyre locked in at enormous fixed costs.

Disney has to hit a home run on pretty much every part of their business just to prevent ESPN from dragging them down. This means more Marvel movies - how many more Super hero brands do they have left? We're now getting to the C - list. They better be pumping out a new Star Wars every year - these franchises better sustain themselves for a long long time.

Look at the 5 year chart and tell me these two stocks are bargains without having to continue their growth train -which may not be easy to continue forever.

Nothing I say constitutes any financial advice.

Here's what you have to know about ESPN. ESPN and ABC — accounted for $5.9 billion of Disney’s $11.1 billion in operating income. Imagine half your income source being at a negative growth rate.

Yes, it's still earning cash but theyre losing subscribers so that revenue source is going to shrink. They are literally losing millions of subscribers.

They cant unbundle because stand alone ESPN would cost $20 per month. Are 90 million people going to pay $20/month to watch ESPN?

ESPN just fired 200 executives from their home office. These were not low paying people. And it wont make a dent on their bottom line.

ESPN owes the University of Texas $15 million a year for the Longhorn Network for next umpteenth years. As a proud alumnus of the University of Texas, I cant even get the Longhorn Network in CT. So why exactly would you pay $15 million a year for a network and not let the 600,000 alums throughout the country watch the channel? Because they were determined to get X amount for it and wouldnt reduce the price to cable companies. I still cant get it unless I get Direct TV. Comcast doesnt show it.

They overpaid for every sports franchise by hundreds of millions of dollars and these are locked in - guaranteed contracts.

This is the type of decision-making that is a black eye to Disney.

By the way, Im not trying to bag the stock - just pointing out the inherent risks.

DIS is extremely polarizing but it's also one of Merrill's top picks for 2016.

The general rule of thumb for retirement is the 4% rule. It's highly controversial - as are all financial planning theories.

The biggest mistake people make is extrapolating their success. Im making 20% on my business and that will last til X, so why invest when my IRR is higher than any vehicle out there. Or Im making $300k a year and that job will last forever so I have no sense of urgency.

If you do have a lot of appreciated company stock in your qualified plan, you may be able to use NUA (net unrealized appreciation) to get favorable tax treatment on gains. The cost basis will still be at ordinary rates. In situations like this, be careful with your IRA rollovers. Consult a professional.

By the way, if you ever want to interview a financial advisor and test his/her acumen, ask them about NUA.

Nothing I write constitutes tax, legal or financial advice

No one can accurately predict the market. The fancy economists make ex post facto explanations on why something happened but rarely can tell you what will happen. It can go up. It can go down.

Nobody knows.

This is just stupid. It's the Lochness monster - prove it doesnt exist. Prove that Bigfoot doesnt exist.
'
Name someone that does not run a business but just makes money in the stock market, trading in and out because they know what will happen to the market for a long period of time. These mysterious wealthy expert market timers.

Think about this. If they can actually predict the market why would it take them decades? If they were really able to predict the market, by simple math, they could have hundreds of millions of dollars in a few years - or less.

And at some point, they would have so much money, they wouldn't need to be in the market at all.

It's called gambling. If he was a really good trader, he'd be working on Wall Street.

I knew a really successful currency trader who worked at UBS. He got laid off and decided to trade on his own. Within a year, he needed to get a job to support his family.

It's a lot easier to do when it's not your money.

Not sure if this is a question/comment or both.

One theory is that baby boomers will cash out of the market and that's certainly possible. However, baby boomers understand that people are living a lot longer than they used to. This is why you dont see many pension plans anymore (many have switched from DB to Cash Balance or none at all). If you expect to live until 90 or beyond (which is certainly possible), now you have to make that money last - and you need equity type returns. With that in mind, I doubt people will just cash out. What's the alternative - money market rates at 1%?

This is why people say it's a Fed driven market. The ridiculously low interest rates have helped drive the market returns.

Corporations used to give pensions because they expected you to retire at 65 and die at 70. Nice little perk for your 30 years of service. 60 is the new 40 blah blah blah.

The reason government employees still get pensions is because it's taxpayer money and not private money. People who gave these generous pensions dont care because by the time these folks cash in, they themselves will be retired.

This also applies to CEOs who want to maximize returns so they can drive the stock price up and cash out their options. Who cares what happens 20 years from now. You also see this when companies use their cash to buy back stock under the guise of "shareholder interest" It's the best use of your capital? Really? Youre not just propping up the stock for your own pecuniary gain? or preserving your legacy (and not as the CEO who dropped the ball)?

With regards to markets affecting Pin prices - there has to be a breaking point. Not sure if there is any item more elastic than Pins. It's unsustainable.