Let me start off by saying that I agree, in principle, with about 90% of this article. Since that makes for a boring read, I'm going to focus on the 10% I disagree with.

There is nothing wrong with conventional valuation methods, nor are they incompatible with the valuation principles outlined in this article.

A robust valuation is one that reconciles the differences between a conventional economic valuation approach, like Discounted Cash Flow (DCF), and other approaches that may be more industry-specific, whether based on Comparables (Comps), Key Valuation Indicators (KVIs) or Qualitative Assessment (QA).

Determining fair value is an iterative process that requires triangulating and corroborating the valuation conclusion with primary and alternative valuation techniques that are sufficiently different in their approach to provide reasonable assurance that all relevant and material factors have been considered.

To state that conventional valuation techniques are antiquated is inconsistent with good valuation principles or practice. On the contrary, this type of logic is fully consistent with professor Shiller's paradigm of the "thought virus" that gives rise to speculative bubbles.