|
Post by davee39 on Jul 5, 2019 8:35:13 GMT
I have looked at the subscription website referred to earlier.
I cannot use the appropriate language to describe the offer for fear of risking legal action against the forum.
The promises are unreal.
There is no formula to guarantee returns of 15 to 25% a year by investment
There is no way to fine tune your mind to become a successful investor
Just as there is no formula to beat the bookies or win at the casino
There is however a get rich quick formula common to numerous websites which is based on misleading claims offering special secrets. There was a plague of Binary Options offers which allowed investors to lose all their money very, very, quickly.
It might be like saying there is no Santa. Sorry. An inexperienced person will not get rich playing the market, what you can hope for is a long term return better than that available from cash.
Anyone who tells you otherwise is probably dishonest.
|
|
corto
Member of DD Central
one-syllabistic
Posts: 851
Likes: 356
|
Post by corto on Jul 5, 2019 9:07:35 GMT
Dear Elephantrosie Don't trust anybody here. Get yourself a proper financial adviser. If you have the money to invest, it costs a fraction of what you can gain. And next year you may want to do it all yourself (or not). Best C Not sure I would say "don't trust anybody here".. The main advice being given by people here is, be wear and not to trust any "get rich quick" schemes, which I think is very good advice. Bear in mind that even quite a few financial advisers are biased to the products they "help you with". Wrong wording; should have been "don't trust any advise given here". Of course, most of us are well meaning and what I appreciate most here is the diversity of opinions, hints and tricks around. It also does not mean "discard it all". However, most of us are amateurs and some share somewhat peculiar or restrictive opinions, like for example that one cannot trust financial advisers or that the stockmarket is dangerous compared with p2p or that the only reasonable thing to do at the stockmarket is to invest in global index trackers. Myths like these seem idiosyncratic and too simple. My adviser suggested JRS for the FC money I got out earlier. That was a worthwhile hint I'd never had come up with myself. He also charges less on the gains than the 10% FC takes.
|
|
bigfoot12
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,817
Likes: 816
|
Stocks
Jul 5, 2019 9:15:47 GMT
Post by bigfoot12 on Jul 5, 2019 9:15:47 GMT
Just as there is no formula to beat the bookies or win at the casino Not true Just as there is no formula to beat the bookies ... Read "Modelling Association Football Scores and Inefficiencies in the Football Betting Market" Dixon and Coles 1997, at least one of them regretted publishing an academic paper rather than just doing it. a)Read "Bringing down the house" (or watch 21 - good film) or b)read up on Ed Thorpe he beet casinos in multiple ways - most now illegal, but not when he did it. Obviously in all cases above, the people were/are very clever, very numerate, and worked hard. All would have probably made more doing something else - in fact Thorpe runs a hedge fund claiming his personal investments have IRR of 20% average over 28 years.
|
|
|
Stocks
Jul 5, 2019 13:16:05 GMT
Ace likes this
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2019 13:16:05 GMT
It might be like saying there is no Santa. What, no Santa?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2019 13:31:14 GMT
I guess if investment quadrant is very good you should be able to get them to warranty every investment you make.
I look forward to hearing their positive response...
On the general subject rather on the specific supplier you have selected I have nothing against get-rich-quick processes but I would run double-blind trials on them with non-real money before I put real money in the pot. I did the same some years ago, it saved me a lot of time/money while letting me meet a lot of interesting people and learning a lot of ways to lose money.
If you think fund managers are just "managers" you have missed the point, many have their own money heavily invested in the overall pot and have a lot of skin in the game, they benefit from being the manager by having a bigger pot to play with and a dilution of the costs of running the fund. Selecting good fund managers takes a lot of time, out of the 3,400 funds that the normal retail consumer can access, I think only 30 are really worth investing in. While of the 400 Trusts, only 15 are worth a look at.
|
|
littleoldlady
Member of DD Central
Running down all platforms due to age
Posts: 3,017
Likes: 1,835
|
Stocks
Jul 5, 2019 14:53:47 GMT
Post by littleoldlady on Jul 5, 2019 14:53:47 GMT
IMO the story that some people won at Blackjack by counting cards was probably spread by casino operators. The margin to the house from Blackjack is far higher than Roulette for example, and any possible improvement in the punter's chances by counting cards will be slight in comparison, spasmodic in occurrence and easily detected if the casino was worried about it.
|
|
hazellend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,361
Likes: 2,179
|
Post by hazellend on Jul 5, 2019 20:40:25 GMT
Bear in mind that even quite a few financial advisers are biased to the products they "help you with".
I feel some much needed clarification is needed here !
You have to distinguish the advisor from their employer.
If you go to a typical large firm. Then the problem you have is not the advisor but their employer.
In a large firm, the spotty oiks in the Compliance Department will "take a view" on risk. Typically that view results in an "approved stocks list" for various grades of risk.
Then, the expectation is, that if you as an advisor are handed an account. As required by the regulator, you will work with the client to assess their risk level and appetite for risk. You will then use that to narrow down your choices from the approved list.
Note that the "approved list" isn't a ready made portfolio. There is scope for discretion. But the investible universe is limited.
What you want to do is look for a decent small or mid-sized firm. Where a financial advisor is allowed a greater amount of discrection, and thus is able to deliver you the definition of Discretionary Portfolio Management (or Advisory Portfolio Management if you want to have a say in matters).
Or you could just go with vanguard and outperform most small/medium/large advisers/wealth management companies
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 5, 2019 22:41:51 GMT
Or you could just go with vanguard and outperform most small/medium/large advisers/wealth management companies
Comments like that only go to underscore your deep levels of naivety in such matters.
Banging on about vanguard (or whatever other passive) like it's the best thing since sliced bread is utter bull excrement.
Repeat after me: There is no one-size fits-all answer in investing.
For example, your beloved vanguard won't work for :
- People with specific goals. Especially if those goals are around income and the risk profille is biased to the low side. - People with a few (or more) million to invest. Blindly sticking that into a passive fund would be dumb beyond imagination. - If you're running something like an IHT portfolio you won't even be able to use a passive.
- Running a multi-million portfolio for a charity or other organisation with reserves (see point one for the reason why).
Sure if you've got a porfolio in the low thousands, can't be arsed to do the research yourself and are too stingy to pay someone else to do it then sure. As long as you understand what passive investing is in terms of investment period needed and the fact that it isn't some sort of magical panacea (i.e. its still possible, no matter how remote you may consider the concept, to loose a chunk of the capital you invested).
Of course it's not a panacea, or a one-size-fits-all, nor was it claimed to be. It is, however, a very sensible option for the vast majority.
|
|
hazellend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,361
Likes: 2,179
|
Post by hazellend on Jul 6, 2019 6:57:09 GMT
Or you could just go with vanguard and outperform most small/medium/large advisers/wealth management companies
Comments like that only go to underscore your deep levels of naivety in such matters.
Banging on about vanguard (or whatever other passive) like it's the best thing since sliced bread is utter bull excrement.
Repeat after me: There is no one-size fits-all answer in investing.
For example, your beloved vanguard won't work for :
- People with specific goals. Especially if those goals are around income and the risk profille is biased to the low side. - People with a few (or more) million to invest. Blindly sticking that into a passive fund would be dumb beyond imagination. - If you're running something like an IHT portfolio you won't even be able to use a passive.
- Running a multi-million portfolio for a charity or other organisation with reserves (see point one for the reason why).
Sure if you've got a porfolio in the low thousands, can't be arsed to do the research yourself and are too stingy to pay someone else to do it then sure. As long as you understand what passive investing is in terms of investment period needed and the fact that it isn't some sort of magical panacea (i.e. its still possible, no matter how remote you may consider the concept, to loose a chunk of the capital you invested).
It amuses me that you find me naive. You do not need to use vanguard. Any cheap index tracker is fine. Ishares/spdr/dbxtrackers etc I am a very experienced investor and despite your warnings it would be dumb I have 900k (after the recent run up)in the vanguard all world etf and will continue to buy this even if I have millions. I also have a defined benefit pension membership for my “bond” holding. I am very confident that most people will do well to ignore your dangerous advice. With a nickname like wall street and from what you say I am guessing that you have some kind of link with the industry. Only have access to iPhone this week so won’t be able to engage in ongoing debate. This guy says everything that I agree with www.kroijer.com/
|
|
invester
P2P Blogger
Posts: 612
Likes: 618
|
Post by invester on Jul 6, 2019 8:26:48 GMT
Arguing about this is a bit like fundamental and technical analysis guys arguing about who is better - there will be good and poor examples in each section.
The case seems quite simple to me, passive investments limit your downside and the upside. For a novice, they clearly are better.
Go on a site like Stockopedia and argue that ETFs are better and you'll probably get people who could supply you with concrete evidence that they are not over a very long period of time.
If you don't know what you are doing and buy stocks without homework, forget it. As an aside I have sought to have an equal investment in Vanguard and a diversified portfolio of stocks since the last couple of years, roughly they are around the same.
|
|
JamesFrance
Member of DD Central
Port Grimaud 1974
Posts: 1,317
Likes: 893
|
Post by JamesFrance on Jul 6, 2019 8:37:17 GMT
My greatest regret when I moved to France was that I had no knowledge of what type of investment worked well for their tax system. I decided it was necessary to use the services of a well known firm of financial advisors and for the first few years they charged more than my investments earned, in fact I was fairly sure that the large bond holdings were intended to provide the income to cover their fees spread over the first 5 years. In addition there were various large annual costs levied by the provider of the Assurance Vie which was the wrapper for the various investment funds.
I am enjoying being based in England now so that my life savings are not having several thousand deducted each year to support the finance industry.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Jul 6, 2019 8:58:11 GMT
If you want to occupy your time in the leisure pursuit of digging into company fundamentals, ratios etc with the hope of beating experienced investment professionals, then go ahead. Just don't expect to make any money whatsoever over the long term, in fact expect to lose it. Even if you diversify. Look at Woodford, this guy was not only doing this professionally but was the best in the business - and still ultimately botched it all up. I also find it instructive to look at what my/wife's pension companies are up to. We both have DC pensions, and all funds that the trustees have selected are very clearly (and mostly explicitly) passive trackers. There's a reason for that, and a reason they're not investing in Woodford/Fundsmith/individual stocks - This is how you build and protect wealth most effectively in the lowest cost and best risk-adjusted way without exposing yourself to your own and others biases, which also happen to come with large implicit or explicit price tags respectively. I'm with hazellend totally here - to be blunt to be kind elephantrosie , just with the sorts of questions you ask it's pretty damn clear you're going to be a lamb to the slaughter if you attempt to pick your own.
|
|
bigfoot12
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,817
Likes: 816
|
Stocks
Jul 6, 2019 9:08:01 GMT
Post by bigfoot12 on Jul 6, 2019 9:08:01 GMT
Have you considered splitting that? Obviously I don't think Vanguard are anything like Equitable Life, Lehmans, GFI...., and the chance of a problem is very small, but the cost of splitting is also very small and you might be able to sell £12k of capital gains worth each year for the next couple of years, a bit more if you have losses elsewhere,...
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2019 9:54:57 GMT
Just on the IFA selection process, I would advise
1) Don't go with one that then palms you off to one of the big 6 investment companies. In that case, all the IFA is doing is acting as a front window for the larger company and really why 2) Do write down what you want to achieve 3) Find an IFA who you can visit easily and physically, there is nothing like having a face to face whenever you are concerned about the market and it is best if you can do that cheaply/easily 4) Visit a few, ask them all to go through your objectives and see what they can do. 5) Expect them to ask questions about your fears and problems with money, if they hold back and let you waffle on about (choose one of a sick mother, multiple job loses etc etc) then deselect. They need to know it all.
6) Ask to talk to another three customers, you want at least one reference to see how well they have done 7) Once you have selected one, agree the rules, negotiate (yes you are allowed to negotiate) for example ask for your fees to be tax efficient. 8) Be prepared to sack your first selection. Because I used to work I never had time to do so and I lost money that way. It was only after I took early retirement did I get around to sacking and re-contracting my IFA and the returns have been much better. (he now does for me as well as I do). 9) Remember, it is not binary, you don't need to give over all your money to an IFA, just what you want to. It is useful to have a guiding hand on at least part of your wealth and it gives you a clear competitor to fight. ;-)
I see a good place for passive funds in the portfolio for a novice investor. But I also believe you need a spread of risks and returns to make sense of the world. So spread your money between BSociety, passive, Shares, Trusts, Funds. I would recommend that if you know anything about anything use that knowledge as part of your "inside" information for part of your portfolio. So if you know "handbags" then Burberry might well be something to follow.
|
|
macq
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,924
Likes: 1,191
|
Stocks
Jul 6, 2019 11:22:03 GMT
Post by macq on Jul 6, 2019 11:22:03 GMT
Arguing about this is a bit like fundamental and technical analysis guys arguing about who is better - there will be good and poor examples in each section. The case seems quite simple to me, passive investments limit your downside and the upside. For a novice, they clearly are better. Go on a site like Stockopedia and argue that ETFs are better and you'll probably get people who could supply you with concrete evidence that they are not over a very long period of time. If you don't know what you are doing and buy stocks without homework, forget it. As an aside I have sought to have an equal investment in Vanguard and a diversified portfolio of stocks since the last couple of years, roughly they are around the same. think if the hundreds of forum pages of active v passive on MSE over the years are anything to go by the arguing on here could last a bit longer Personally i am sticking with my IT's which are also cost effective compered to OEIC's and over the long term have performed but have added a couple of trackers within a pension.It can also depend on what you want to invest in to spread your assets (if indeed you do) i.e bonds,property,renewables or infrastructure may be better using a manager but there are also trackers/ETF that do the job and i have a couple from L&G
|
|