I've been negative on this company for six months along with...

I've been negative on this company for six months along with visible disclosure as "not held". If I were ever losing my hair I can afford the hair transplants with a a top surgeon, meanwhile you'd be stuck in a third world country back alley gluing pubic hairs onto your head.

A little ironic being projected upon by a guy literally naming himself "saltyinvestor", not a surprise when you're likely grinding a five figure 9-5 at 55 and the best you can do when it comes to investment is attacking people who own/owned a collapsing stock.

To be very clear, your first post on this stock was at $20, when the companies already lost 65%+ in price from all time high. You've come to the conclusion that this stock is a bad investment after its already down more than 65% in a few years and over a period where we already knew of underperformance of 18%+? Sorry for ever doubting your genius sir, a whippersnapper like me could do with a few tips from a seasoned vet like yourself that can figure out after a house burns down that its worth less than prior to burning down.

There's no basis for "10%" being some kind of magical peak number for an investment or fund to yield PA long term. Your comment was the equivalent of the local witchdoctor making predictions from tealeaves, no one with any industry experience or credentials in finance would agree with your comment because its demonstrably false.

I absolutely do think MFG is a perfect example of why index funds are often the simplest and best choice for many individuals and for pieces of portfolio allocation, but to act like there aren't small numbers of active funds achieving 20-30% over extended periods is delusional. Do I think MFG is going to rapidly move back to former glory or blow out the index? Probably not.