Folks reading this article should also read Nicholas Taleb's "Fooled by Randomness".  The empirical data is overwhelming that low-fee index investing will outperform active management.  Does that mean active management will never outperform an index fund?  No, of course not.  Some people will outperform but is that reflective of the superior financial acumen of the fund manager or just plain luck.  The fund manager will say financial acumen, statistics and probabilities say plain luck.  I'd give anyone odds that with the fees these funds are charging that over the next 15 years they underperform the market.  

If someone wins the lottery are they particularly good at choosing the winning numbers or were they just plain lucky? Do they have a better chance at winning the lottery the next time they play?  

You decide.