Prior to GFC I had only invested in property. When Lehmann Brothers collapsed and the market was in turmoil I realised there were a lot of people making a fortune out of it. But you had to have cash to be one of those people. Luckily I did.
Prior to that, I bought my very first property at the top of a boom and saw it's value go nowhere for close to a decade. Lesson learnt. My next property returned 40% in 18 months without so much as painting a wall.
So, does the old saying of "time in the market, not timing the market" actually ring true? Not for me to say it does or doesn't, for most it probably does.
But I do know that having cash and the guts to buy during the depths of the GFC, provided far better returns in a much shorter time frame than leaving all your funds invested throughout. Take Macurthur coal, it was selling for $2.20 down from ~$20 and they had something like $300m in the bank, clearly not going to go bust. A few years later it was bought out for ~$16. CSL was $25 odd now $250. Alphabet hit lows of $133 from $300 odd, now $1200. How much farther can this bull run go? Another 10%, 20%? maybe 50%? It's chicken feed.
Similarly, buying property when no one is talking about it, or when it is a "bad time to buy" provides a much better return than simply "having time in the market".
Regarding Buffet, I read the article about the guy who sold out because Buffet's average was a few percent lower than the index since GFC. No one cares about a few percent. But I can guarantee after the next crisis, that war chest will go to work and make 100's of percent more gain for patient holders.
