@Fella. We're not really that far apart. You just misunderstand what I'm saying. I never said that I thought I had an edge over the market. I feel like a broken record in saying that my ambition with every purchase is to earn a long-term return of around 6% to 7% a year. If I think one of my holdings will earn less than that in future, I sell, irrespective of how it's done in the past. Of course, I sometimes get it wrong, as I've readily admitted. I don't care if the return from the overall portfolio is more or less than the market. It so happens that I've done better than the market over the last few years but that's beside the point. Let's leave shorts out of it for the moment; in any event, I have a relatively small exposure to short positions. I'll articulate my logic with shorts some other time. I'll just concentrate on the long positions. Take Apple, which you mentioned in your last post. If you read my original posting on Apple of 6 December 2015, when the share price was $92, I said why I thought its earnings would keep growing and that it was priced as if it was "a staid company in a mature industry", instead of being "arguably the leading technology companies of our age." I reckoned that it would deliver my target return - and it has. I'll now have to re-do my sums to check if I think it will continue to deliver 6% pa in future from its current price. If I conclude that it will, I'll hold on. I won't sell even if I think something else will do better, which is what I'd do if I was trying to beat the market. I'm happy to hold on to shares that I think will deliver the required return in future. Full stop. If you look at any of my analyses as published in this column, you should find with all of them that the question I'm trying to answer is the simple: "Do I think it will deliver the target 6%/7% pa?" not "How can I beat the market?"