Seeking Alpha

South Gent

 
View as an RSS Feed
View southgent1951's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Flyer's Basket Strategy: Bought 50 Shares Of Solar Capital At $18.38 [View article]
    Hardog:. One of the comments above wanted to know why I would do this research and then buy only 50 shares. I have to dig before I can decide how much to risk.

    After looking at SLRC, my judgment call was that the appropriate classification tilted slightly into the Flyer's basket risk category, though it was close on whether I would buy 50 or 100 shares.

    I listed my concerns at the start of this article: "its declining weighted average net yield on its income producing investments, the current payout in excess of its net interest income per share, the external management, the prior dividend cut, and the usual assortment of risks inherent in BDCs."

    The weighted average yield decline is something that is a major concern for BDCs in general. For SLRC, it is reflected in the table included in the article. Interest rates are trending down and many BDCs, as noted by Solar's executives during the last conference call, are moving down the capital structure in order to secure more yield.

    Given the risk characteristics of these private companies receiving the loans, an unsecured subordinated loan would most likely become worthless in a BK and consequently has a very high yield now. If any of these senior secured loans were rated by Moody's or S & P, I seriously doubt that any of them would receive higher than CCC+. The subordinated unsecured loans would be in the C or CC area.

    Even a first lien loan would generally, though not always, receive less than 80% of the par amount and frequently a lot less. Second lien bonds can attached to nothing but vapor when there is a BK and a substantial amount of first lien loans. That was the case with a Reddy Ice second lien bond. An Exide senior secured bond is now trading at around 10% of its par value, and has been trending down since that company filed for BK:

    http://bit.ly/1HHqLz2

    One of the BDCs, Medley Capital, owned that one and had it listed near 63 when it filed its last report with a cost around 90:

    Page F-6:
    http://1.usa.gov/1HHqITY

    Why is that firm charging hedge fund like fees to buy a junky bond available for purchase in the bond market by any investor?

    One thing to keep in mind is that many of these BDCs are destroying their net asset values per share. Assuming that continues at the same pace going forward, that is an elevator headed to the ground floor.

    TICC went from $9.85 to $9.4 during the first nine months.

    $9.4 Q/E 9/14:
    http://1.usa.gov/1HHqIU0

    To correct an error made in the article that I noticed yesterday, my Lottery Ticket basket with its $300 maximum is of course my "highest risk" category, not my "lowest". I had a brain misfire when typing that sentence, and have corrected it in my Instablog here. I have to go through an SA editor to correct an error in an "article", and that kind of mistake is not worth the effort since it is obvious in context.
    Nov 26, 2014. 11:41 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Flyer's Basket Strategy: Bought 40 BDCL Shares At $23.53 [View article]
    GGJR: I thought that you might be a reader of Tyler Durden's Zero Hedge columns.




    Nov 26, 2014. 01:18 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Best Ways To Invest -- What's Your Opinion? A Place To Share Ideas! #48 [View instapost]
    Dapizz: The USD has risen in value against the GDP and the EUR over the past several months which makes European stocks cheaper for a USD investor. The weakness in those currencies will flow through into the prices of a U.S. listed ADR or a USD priced fund that owns European stocks. There was another precipitous decline in the Euro back in 2010, going from around 1.48 to 1.22 over a six month period. I used that weakness to pick up some European ADRs. The AXA ADR had declined over 40% in price, partly due to the decline in Euro and also due to the decline in the ordinary shares for non-fundamental reasons. I mention that point when discussing the purchase of a Canadian REIT this morning.


    http://seekingalpha.co...

    Many of the large European companies have worldwide operations and have continued to grow earnings notwithstanding Europe's stagnation. And, the Shiller CAPE ratios are far lower compared to the U.S. This site has a map of Shiller P/E's by country:

    http://bit.ly/1tmP3bZ

    I have been buying more European, Canadian and Australian stocks recently.

    Another alternative is simply to buy a low cost diversified European ETF that can be bought commission free at your broker. Fidelity offers iShares Core MSCI Europe ETF (IEUR) on a commission free basis.

    That one has a .14% expense ratio:

    http://bit.ly/1FqFuwc

    I have started to accumulate shares, slowly, which is the usual way that I do just about anything.
    Nov 26, 2014. 09:59 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Flyer's Basket Strategy: Bought 40 BDCL Shares At $23.53 [View article]
    "The rich have the luxury" to invest in instruments that pay a negative real rate of return or a slightly positive one. While investments will vary, the general tendency is toward capital preservation through wide diversification rather than capital appreciation:

    http://bit.ly/1thQdSa

    The vast majority of households do not have that luxury. The last FED survey of household finances highlights the financial position of households by quintile.

    http://1.usa.gov/1t4NITy

    I sold my remaining ten year TIPs, bought at auction in 2009, when the buyer paid me 120.5 for TIPs maturing in 2019 that had a real coupon of 1.875%. The buyer's current yield was a negative -.89% at that price. I received more in profit in 2012 than I would have received in interest payments through the 2019 maturity.

    http://bit.ly/10dTS4o

    That is what I call total return investing. Selling GE back in the 1990s and buying back more shares at 1/2 the price is another.

    An investor focused on income may have enough to pay current expenses and their plan may appear to be working in that sense, until additional expenses start to occur which requires an invasion of the principal at an inopportune time to pay expenses. I anticipate that will be a common occurrence in the decades to come.

    Take as an example an investor, who focuses on high yield dividend streams rather than total return, and consequently bought PSEC with its juicy yield at $11.98 on 10/18/12.

    The stock closed today at $9.48 or 20.88% below the purchase price two plus years ago.

    How is that investor really doing?

    The income is still being paid at slightly higher incremental amounts than at the time of purchase.

    I have noted on that one that the next major PSEC dividend move, which has a large weighting in BDCL, will be down; and there is no doubt in my mind that the dividend will be cut long before the rate is restored to the pre-2010 dividend cut level, which was $.41 per quarter, slashed to $.1 monthly.

    http://bit.ly/18dbPH4

    How important is the dividend yield when the price is drifting down over a long period of time and is that kind of security generating the kind of total return that satisfies an investor's needs currently or those reasonably anticipated over the future.

    If not, then when shares have to be sold, probably for a loss, there will be less income generated by the remainder and the portfolio drifts into kamikaze mode with the flight trajectory dependent on the amount needed to pay for the increased expenses (e.g. 24/7 caregiver service now being paid for my 91 year old mother, a nursing home for one or both spouses, higher rates of medical inflation and/or a change in traditional Medicare to a voucher system that basically transfers the increased costs from the government to the senior citizens which is how that plan improved government finances) Other sources of dividend loss would be a rise in short term borrowing costs for the levered securities like BDCL and dividend cuts which are fairly common among BDCs.

    The FED will be raising the FF rate next year. The pace will likely be very measured and slow, possibly starting with a .25 basis point increase next September. There are certainly telegraphing much higher short term rates in their public disclosures:

    See FED Document under Heading "Appropriate pace of policy firming"
    http://1.usa.gov/1gObnFS
    Nov 25, 2014. 10:11 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Flyer's Basket Strategy: Bought 40 BDCL Shares At $23.53 [View article]
    Positive real stock market returns occur in long term secular bull market cycles, where the annualized total return for the S & P 500 would be 14%+ adjusted for inflation. A long term bear cycle will generally result in a negative total annualized return adjusted for inflation. It is important for an individual to correctly identify the current cycle, and the reasons that are powering the cycle, and then to develop a strategy appropriate for that cycle.

    Long Term Bull Cycles:
    S & P 500 Adjusted for Inflation With Dividends Reinvested

    January 1949 through December 1965 = +14.183%

    August 1982 through March 2000= +15.546%

    March 2009 through October 2014= +18.625%

    http://bit.ly/RJFnmR

    I came of age as an investor in a long term secular bear market for bonds and stocks, when both major asset classes failed due in large part to problematic inflation.

    For the S & P 500, the annualized total return adjusted for inflation was -1.813% between 1/1/1966 and July 1982. That bear market was much harder to navigate then the most recent one that started in 2000, since I could rely on bonds as part of a total return balanced portfolio strategy between 2000-March 2009. That was not the case in the 1970s.

    To generate an inflation adjusted total return during a long term bear cycle, which will have one or two catastrophic declines, it is important to identify which asset classes or sectors are working, if any, and to focus more funds in those classes or sectors. Bonds would have been such a category in the last bear cycle but not in the January 1966 to August 1982 cycle. Back then, energy stocks were working after the Arab Oil Embargo, gold and silver shined until 1980, and the Japanese market was in full bull mode. The other point would be that trading needs to be more frequent, as in buying the dips and selling the rips, whereas a buy and hold strategy is more appropriate in a long term bull cycle with nips and tucks.

    I do not regard that discussion in your referenced link to be very helpful in designing the correct strategy, and it fails to properly analyze the historical periods in my opinion. There is no single strategy that will fit all time periods.

    In the last analysis, what matters is whether the investor is meeting their financial goals. Many may think that is occurring but what they have done or doing would not stand up under impartial and informed scrutiny.

    One flaw is that people are seriously underestimating the potential costs over a 25 year retirement period. What will medical costs be like for a couple retiring at 65 now? Fidelity estimates that this couple would need $220,000 "(in today’s dollars) to cover medical expenses throughout retirement. . . What’s more, that $220,000 in estimated costs does not include any costs associated with nursing-home care, and applies only to retirees with traditional Medicare insurance coverage"

    http://bit.ly/1o6G9aH

    The CBO estimated that the GOP's voucher plan approved by the House would cost seniors about twice the premiums as traditional medicare:

    Figure 1 Page 3 Kaiser Foundation Publication:
    http://bit.ly/1bwtsR6

    Since I am writing checks now for my mother's 24/7 caregiver services, I see other types of costs before you get into food, transportation, other insurance costs, property taxes, major home repairs, etc.

    In the last analysis, the approach taken by an investor to meet those financial goals will either work or it will fail. That investor will bear the consequences, favorable or unfavorable, of their decisions made over a lifetime. Time will separate the winners from everyone else. The rich have the luxury of investing in 10 year German government yielding less than 1% or 10 year TIPs which closed today at a .42% current yield:

    http://1.usa.gov/yFD89A

    For everyone else, more risks will have to be taken in order to meet or even come close to meeting their financial goals. I simply would not follow the path myself of using 2x leveraged products and then levering them up another two times with borrowed money. Instead, I am using a diversified balanced portfolio of close to 400 securities, all owned free and clear with no borrowings, to generate a constant stream of income and dividends.
    Nov 25, 2014. 06:58 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Flyer's Basket Strategy: Bought 40 BDCL Shares At $23.53 [View article]
    GGjr: This is what I said in the article:

    "The main reason for buying this type of security is to harvest one or more dividends and then escape with a profit. If BDCs do improve in price over the coming weeks or months, then I have a cushion to hold onto BDCL longer and to harvest more than one dividend."

    That is consistent with what I am saying in these comments:

    "I will simply play it based on what the market gives me. If I get a bump to $30, where the price was earlier this year, for example, I may be more inclined to hold for the dividend, though a subsequent decline to $28 from $30, which does not result from an ex-dividend adjustment, might trigger a sell and a decision about a possible new entry point."

    So if the market gives me a price cushion on the BDCL price, I will hold longer to harvest more dividends. I am more impressed by the potential downside than many here at SA, and so I will not be greedy on the upside.

    In either event, buy, hold or sell, the impact from one security will not have much of an impact on my overall results, even those where I bought up to $10,000 initially. That is by design, where risk assessment now trumps other considerations:

    Portfolio management techniques are generally discussed in this blog from last April:


    Portfolio Management Goals-Snapshots of Performance Numbers YTD, 3 and 5 Years Cumulative
    Scroll to: Portfolio Management and Performance Numbers
    http://bit.ly/1tjvWhn

    I would just note that these 2x leveraged securities are in my opinion extremely risky. The total annualized returns over a significant period of time, adjusted for inflation, could be negative. For those who have to focus on total returns, and that would be most Americans, the risk and total return potential, or lack thereof, has to be taken into consideration.



    Nov 25, 2014. 04:39 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Flyer's Basket Strategy: Bought 40 BDCL Shares At $23.53 [View article]
    GGJR: As to MO, I flushed out everything in 1999 based on my concerns about the crazy valuations. My point is not that MO was a good hold until now, unlike some of the others that I sold in the late 1990s like GE and KO (later buying back at less than 1/2 of the price with more shares owned now)

    Instead, I am responding to your contention about commissions impacting returns which is of course true and easy to calculate.

    My point is simply that it does not require much money to make money in stocks, with MO as just one of many examples. I am making good returns in my LT basket with a $300 limit on the purchase, where commissions eat up more per share than in the Flyer's basket. AMOT is just one example, as is my current unrealized gain in RFMD.

    The question ultimately comes down to stock selection and patience rather than the impact of commissions on the total return.

    If I buy a stock using $1000, and I hold for say 10 years with a 10% annualized and compounded return, the commission is not going to be that important to me at $16 round trip. The problem for me is whether I can resist the temptation to take the 100%+ profit or allow the stock to run, possibly into a brick wall but maybe into one where a $1,000 turns into $100,000 which would have been the case for someone buying Apple as recently as its release of the first IPOD a few years ago, when you could buy a 100 shares for $10, now 700 after the split.
    Nov 25, 2014. 03:53 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Flyer's Basket Strategy: Bought 40 BDCL Shares At $23.53 [View article]
    There are several possible reasons for the weakness in BDC stocks, only one of those is tax loss selling.

    I don't think anyone can say whether the weakness is due to that kind of temporary factor, or a more fundamental change in attitude about the desirability of this sector.

    Consequently, there is no way to know now whether my purchase price will be the near the low, followed by an improvement in price due the removal of temporary downside price pressures, or just a way station to even lower prices.

    I do know, based on the pricing of the individual components, that a number are selling at unusually large discounts to net asset value per share. I believe that PSEC is ex dividend today and the price is now slightly over a 10% discount to net asset value per share. Earlier this year, the stock was selling at over $11 or greater than a 5% premium to its then reported NAV per share.

    I have had good results in the past placing an AON GTC limit order on exchange traded bonds, including several "trust certificates" during the Dark Period in 2008. On one of those, which had the symbol JZE, I had a fill at $12.5 using a GTC AON order, which was the lowest price every paid for that security that was later redeemed some time ago at $25. That security had as its underlying bond a senior AT & T bond and was paying me over 12% at my cost.

    Snapshot of Redemption for JZE and Partial JZJ later redeemed in full:

    Another Partial Call by the Owner of the JZJ Call Warrant
    http://bit.ly/1glUvV0


    On other occasions, I left money on the table trying to get a better price.

    I recognize that I am unable to predict the future and sometimes it is just better to act rather than to think too much.
    Nov 25, 2014. 03:40 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Flyer's Basket Strategy: Bought 40 BDCL Shares At $23.53 [View article]
    GGJR: I paid the full Fidelity commission on the BDCL trade and the impact of that commission on a 40 share lot purchase is not difficult to calculate.

    I am still more or less compus mentis.

    Given my risk assessment for this security, I would not own any shares if I had to buy 100. Each investor has to arrive at their own comfort level. You are apparently averaging down and owning a lot more shares, and I hope that the total return meets your objectives.

    As to your point about commissions, that is frequently the only observation made by commenters when I discuss a buy in my Lottery Ticket Basket and Flyer's Basket risk strategies. I am told over and over again about how commissions impact return. There should be almost no return then for the Lottery Ticket strategy which has a $300 limit, much lower than the Flyer's Basket.

    I will drag and drop here a response to a similar comment, where the author said commission would kill the returns, made in another article, which criticism is valid in isolation and without regard to what I am able to do with small investments over periods of time:

    "The Flyer's Basket has a $500 to $1,000 risk control range. There is one that sits below that basket, which I call the Lottery Ticket Basket, where your point would have even more force, since the limit is $300.

    Yet, even though I will keep the total out-of-pocket exposure to around $6,000 to $8,000 in that strategy, I have generated over $14,000 in returns taking immaterial risks with each security. I have had several burns and crashes too. Have the fees "killed this portfolio strategy"?

    Snapshots at the end of this Gateway Post:
    http://bit.ly/TkDIoK

    I am trying to decide now what to do with the 50 shares of RFMD bought at $5.18 last December as part of that very limited exposure strategy. Do you have any constructive suggestions?

    http://bit.ly/1pCEobs

    When I sold 40 AMOT share at $16 a few weeks ago, which were bought at $5.95, I had the shares pop another $4 after I sold that small odd lot.

    Harvested AMOT Profit +157% Based on Total Cost-Sold 40 AMOT at $16
    http://bit.ly/1r3Udun

    I may have been a little unclear when discussing the 10% annualized goal. I will make a decision on the sell side of the equation based on subsequent developments. I may hold for a decade or more. I have learned in the past that it does not take much of an investment to generate large returns. A $1,000 investment in MO stock back 1982, say August 15, 1982, would be worth over $492,500 now with dividends reinvested.

    http://longrundata.com


    The important point for me now is to generate income with less risk which requires a risk assessment on every purchase made."

    Nov 25, 2014. 02:20 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Flyer's Basket Strategy: Bought 50 Shares Of Solar Capital At $18.38 [View article]
    JIM: The 10% annualized return would be after commissions. When commission cost is spread over fewer shares, that will obviously negatively impact the total return which is a price paid for assuming less risk through a lower investment.

    The Flyer's Basket has a $500 to $1,000 risk control range. There is one that sits below that basket, which I call the Lottery Ticket Basket, where your point would have even more force, since the limit is $300.

    Yet, even though I will keep the total out-of-pocket exposure to around $6,000 to $8,000 in that strategy, I have generated over $14,000 in returns taking immaterial risks with each security. I have had several burns and crashes too. Have the fees "killed this portfolio strategy"?

    Snapshots at the end of this Gateway Post:
    http://bit.ly/TkDIoK

    I am trying to decide now what to do with the 50 shares of RFMD bought at $5.18 last December as part of that very limited exposure strategy. Do you have any constructive suggestions?

    http://bit.ly/1pCEobs

    When I sold 40 AMOT share at $16 a few weeks ago, which were bought at $5.95, I had the shares pop another $4 after I sold that small odd lot.

    Harvested AMOT Profit +157% Based on Total Cost-Sold 40 AMOT at $16
    http://bit.ly/1r3Udun

    I may have been a little unclear when discussing the 10% annualized goal. I will make a decision on the sell side of the equation based on subsequent developments. I may hold for a decade or more. I have learned in the past that it does not take much of an investment to generate large returns. A $1,000 investment in MO stock back 1982, say August 15, 1982, would be worth over $492,500 now with dividends reinvested.

    http://longrundata.com


    The important point for me now is to generate income with less risk which requires a risk assessment on every purchase made.
    Nov 25, 2014. 02:03 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Flyer's Basket Strategy: Bought 40 BDCL Shares At $23.53 [View article]
    GGJR: When I calculate dividend yield in any post, I will do it at the price paid for simplicity purposes. Investors pay different commissions and need to calculate their own total cost number based on their applicable rates. Frequently, when I fund a new brokerage account, I will receive a couple hundred of commission free trades.

    I am of course aware that the total cost per share goes up with the commission, which is how I would compute total return numbers when I sell the security. I will include in my blog a snapshot of the realized gain or loss when I sell a security, which would include commission costs, and will frequently calculate the total return number that would include dividends, either paid in cash or used to buy additional shares that are all hopefully sold for a profit.

    My general goal with BDCs is to secure a total return in excess of the dividend yield at my cost. That would be the hoped for annualized and compounded result for BDCL. To realize it, however, the market's current unfavorable view of BDC's will need to change materially, with the 2x leverage working for the BDCL owners rather than against them.

    A 10%+ total annualized return for a BDC purchase can be difficult particularly for those externally managed ones which are the ones that I normally buy as noted in the article. In that analysis, I am referring to both dividend return and any unrealized or realized gains on the shares.

    With BDCL's dividend I have more leeway in securing a 10% annualized return even with a significant share loss, compared to my investments in lower yielding individual BDCs.

    I will simply play it based on what the market gives me. If I get a bump to $30, where the price was earlier this year, for example, I may be more inclined to hold for the dividend, though a subsequent decline to $28 from $30, which does not result from an ex-dividend adjustment, might trigger a sell and a decision about a possible new entry point. So, I am not a long term holder of BDCL or BDCs in general, but simply use them in small amounts to generate dividends along with several hundred other securities. I certainly would not want much, if any exposure, when the next recession occurs. I would say the same about individual junk bonds which I now own too.
    Nov 25, 2014. 01:44 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Flyer's Basket Strategy: Bought 50 Shares Of Solar Capital At $18.38 [View article]
    Six-OH: I receive a lot of criticism about how I control risk given my emphasis on preservation of capital and income generation. I rarely receive substantive comments.

    Those criticisms do not address my overall performance results achieved with my various risk control strategies, which I do publish, including the risk control process that led me to buy no more than 50 SLRC shares. I take snapshots of Fidelity's computations:

    E.G.:

    April 2014
    Portfolio Management Goals-Snapshots of Performance Numbers YTD, 3 and 5 Years Cumulative
    http://bit.ly/1tjvWhn

    July 2014
    http://bit.ly/1AzncYi

    December 2011:
    Main Taxable and Regular IRA Accounts Performance Numbers Calculated by Broker
    http://bit.ly/U1amOe

    I am taking less risk with a $900 investment compared to buying 200 or 100 shares of SLRC at $18.38. I understand that you disagree. You think that I am taking more risk with a 50 share purchase.

    I am controlling risk in part by the amount of each investment. I do not deviate from those strategies and discipline that require a balancing of potential risks and rewards for every purchase. I am comfortable buying $10,000 worth of NVS shares but not more than a $1,000 of SLRC.

    I am focused on income generation in the aggregate rather than the individual components. The income generation on 50 SLRC shares is immaterial in isolation. It becomes material only when aggregated with the very large number of income generating securities that I own that provides me now with a constant stream of cash.

    The 10% hoped for number is annualized and compounded. At that rate, money will double in about 7.27 years:

    http://bit.ly/U5wENS

    The holding period for the SLRC shares is not set. The holding period could be 20 years or 1 year depending on my assessments of SLRC's performance. Since I am retired, living off my investments, I have time to make that assessment quarterly or semi-annually on 400 or so owned securities. For many of those securities, I have allocated substantially more capital as noted in prior comments, articles and Instablogs published at SA and in my 2000 or so blogs at my website.



    Nov 25, 2014. 12:44 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Best Ways To Invest -- What's Your Opinion? A Place To Share Ideas! #48 [View instapost]
    LMH: I have tried many times to receive the Lord's guidance on my investments, but so far I have not heard back.

    I thought that I had found the answer a few years back, when I would write buy, sell or hold on three wads of paper, throw them high in the air, and then the Lord would intervene, causing the correct wad to fall nearest my big toe.

    That appeared to be the appropriate method to receive guidance about the future, working maybe twice, until the Devil took over and led me astray.

    I can say without any doubt that psychological factors will generally be the ultimate source of my less than optimal decisions.

    Still, even with an abundance of those less than optimal decisions, sometimes called mistakes, I have done well over the years, but could have done much better with a slightly better harness on those emotional interferences with rational decision making.

    The mistake may simply be taking a profit too soon or refraining from buying due to a fear about losing money which was the case when I pulled back from buying BRK/A in 1974. A variety of emotional factors come into play. Two of my problems, most likely to continue for the remainder of my life, is that I think too much at times and make too many decisions.

    Now, it comes down for me to preservation of capital and income generation. I can live now off the income being generated by my investments, so I have reached a good place notwithstanding what I call "error creep" in my blog:

    ERROR CREEP and the INVESTING PROCESS
    http://bit.ly/TJXme2

    As to Gilead, I have shied away since the company does not pay a dividend, and I am more comfortable with Novartis, a more diversified and larger company with a long history of dividend increases.
    Nov 25, 2014. 11:22 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Dividend Growth Investing Doesn't Work: Intel And Philip Morris Edition [View article]
    MJS: That is correct. I am pointing out to the younger readers here at SA, who are still in an accumulation phase, that patience is a virtue in investing, something that I have never managed to acquire in any significant dosage.

    An investor can make a lot of mistakes, and a few right ones, and still achieve their financial goals, provided they ride the wave for a long time and refrain from jumping ship when the weather turns unfavorable. A $10,000 investment in MO made in 1982, even if I sold the spin-offs, would be more than adequate to meet all of my financial goals.

    A 100 share buy of BRK/A in 1974 at $16 would have been even better.

    There are times when it would be appropriate to harvest a profit and move to another investment. Differentiating between a hold and a sell in real time is not that easy, primarily due to the future not being written in stone.

    Nonetheless, I am also pleased that I jettisoned PFE, GE and KO in the late 1990s and bought back GE and KO when the prices were more than 50% below their peak period prices during the crazy period. I am no longer interested in PFE, and I now own NVS as my main large Pharma pick.

    "Dividend Growth Strategy: Novartis"
    http://seekingalpha.co...

    Nov 25, 2014. 09:20 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Best Ways To Invest -- What's Your Opinion? A Place To Share Ideas! #48 [View instapost]
    Blue: I would never have the patience to buy and hold a stock over such a long period. I went to 100% cash in 1999. I wish that I still owned some of the stocks bought in 1982. One or two good buys like MO would have been most welcome now.

    I am pointing out to LMH and the other youngsters that patience is a virtue, and it does not take a lot of money to achieve retirement goals with a limited number of good selections held for a long time. If I had spent $1,600 to buy 100 BRK/A in 1974 and held to today, no other investment since that time would matter, unless I was still in the market to buy Canada, all of it, and rename it Northern Tennessee.
    Nov 25, 2014. 09:00 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
3,129 Comments
2,332 Likes