Basically.
but bear in mind that: 1) the definition of what is a 'blue chip' changes more regularly than you might think (anyone want some General Electric or Ford stock? thought not. 2) not all property is equal. Today it's an attractive beach front property in Thailand, the next it's 10 feet underwater.
Agreed. Property has as many permutations as the stock market - you can invest in high or low risk property. As a very rough rule of thumb when the property market is going up, the stock market is going down and vice versa, so theoretically it probably isn't a bad idea to have investments in both types.
Realistically though, people are usually drawn to either the stock market or property market depending on "which one they like". If you're into shares and similar, you can always invest in a fund that in turn invests in properties for example - you'd gain some diversification in that way.
If you're investing for your retirement, most people would go for reasonably safe, reasonable yield investments for the majority of their investment - blue chip stuff usually falls in this category. Banks, supermarket chains, that sort of thing. As long as you're reasonably diversified, you'll generally be fine over the long term. One company might tank and go under occasionally, but overall you'll see decent, sustained growth.
Putting money in the bank is of course extremely safe, but the returns are lower as a result. It certainly pays to have some money in the bank, but I think it's fair to say the average safe investor will put most of their money in blue chip shares for example, rather than a bank.
Again, it depends on how much you want, when you want it, and how risk-averse you are.
