OT.... having trouble not informing people... I really will try to stop being helpful now...
There is a big difference between efficient markets *theory*/*hypothesis* (which is false) and the efficient markets *theorem*. Let me explain.
Here's the *theorem*...
* IF everyone has the same information,
* AND everyone has the same ability to analyze the information,
* AND everyone has the same market power (this is basically monopoly-type power),
* THEN nobody would be able to beat the market.
This is, of course, true -- it's been proven mathematically.
However, the premises are blatantly false. Everyone has different information, different abilities to analyze it, and different amounts of market power. (The efficient markets *theory* claims that the premises are true, which is ridiculous.)
Using the contrapositive, we find that,
* IF someone can beat the market, then
* EITHER they have better information,
* OR they have better ability to analyze information
* OR they have more market power
Retail investors never have market power. So the only way retail investors can ever beat the market is to have better information or better analysis of it. Which is an interesting clarifying point when investing: if you think you have a way to beat the market, ask yourself "What do I understand that most of these yahoos don't understand?" If you can't think of anything, you don't have a good investment.
