REPLY.

The author provides a response to an earlier article in this journal that criticized his work in the field of finance. The author comments on Durand's focus on statistical reliability. The author takes issue with Durand's criticism of the value of call deferment, claiming that the statistical sampling error was small. The author acknowledges that the second section of the paper presented a model, which was clearly untested, and argues that Durand cannot visit the same expectations on that model, which lacked data for testing. The author proposes that perhaps Durand's time had been better spent proposing a better solution.