Do Performance Comparisons To S&P 500 Matter To Dividend Growth Investors? [View article]
fschew, '''Kindly complete part b of the Question 1, "And for maximum total return, who would you want investing your money ?"''
Please tell me how you predict "maximum total return" and why you contradict the facts in your prediction with fake choices?
Please tell me for your 1000% return, which you would prefer: a) Nothing for 99 years, 1000% in year 100 b) Plus/minus a random amount every year, eventually reaching 1000% gain only to lose it all the next year c) Same as 'b' except every year 2% to 10% of your portfolio value returned in cash, a higher percentage in years when your portfolio is reduced from the prior year.
Do Not Let The 1966-1981 Stock Market Dishearten You [View article]
'''I'm here to learn how to improve my investing skills. Let's talk about that.'''
Seconded!
It is TOTALLY POINTLESS to claim MY strategy "won't work because 'most people don't save enough for retirement' because 'they simply do not make enough to save' and 'obviously talking about the less fortunate.'"
Do Not Let The 1966-1981 Stock Market Dishearten You [View article]
'''Robert: "You could if you were an income investor, and your dividends were rising each year by more than inflation"
'''The average annual inflation rate was 7.06% between 1970-1979:'''
Again you cherry pick your dates to (mis)prove your point.
What was the total inflation from 1964 to 1982 as used in your KO example to which Robert was replying? About 3.11x. What was the increase in the KO dividend? 3.3x.
KO dividend wins. Your contrived example fails. Again.
Do Not Let The 1966-1981 Stock Market Dishearten You [View article]
'''To keep it simple, the investor bought 1 KO share for the split adjusted price of $1.46 in October 1964 and had to sell that one share in April 1982 for $.7. '''
To keep it simple and inaccurate?
Nice to pick such a good peak to start investing.
What about the dividends?
Ever considered reinvesting dividends or making more than one lump sum purchase?
The results are amazingly good when you accumulate more shares quarterly thruout the ups and downs of a bear market.
Dividend Stocks Crush Gold In The Long-Term [View article]
filipo wries, '''People with debts don't have fiat. Actually, they have negative fiat and hence, they must be very pessimistic on the perspective of fiat.'''
Excellent point! I actually have debt denominated in U.S. dollars of about 20% of my liquid assets, which is considerably more than I have in cash or even sum of cash and cash equivalents.
In the "cash" sense I might be "short fiat" but since we are talking U.S. fiat, I have to include my long-term treasuries. That leaves my net U.S. fiat position at about 5% of my liquid assets and even less when I include land, etc.
Dividend Stocks Crush Gold In The Long-Term [View article]
''' "Do you keep 100% of your worth in a single asset?"
'''I do not. But for those talking 'fiat is worthless', it would be odd of them to keep any in fiat if they really believed that. '''
Care to point out a specific example where someone is claiming "fiat is worthless" ? I see no evidence the miners you tried to use are making that claim. Is anyone?
The Peacock's Tail And Dividend Growth Companies [View instapost]
Great analogy, Robert!
I've never thought to apply handicap theory to dividend growers, but it sure seems to fit.
Everything I look at as advantageous to me as a dividend growth investor, could at the first level analysis be a disadvantage to the company. Only by looking deeper can we see it might actually be better for the company, like a peacock's tail. Or maybe like working out...
Dividend Growth Investing - The End Game [View article]
'''MPT-based investing--which many advisers follow--has a lot going for it. It has a strong, research-backed record of success, is much more easily managed, and takes substantially less time and hard work.'''
All of that is true, except for the "research-backed record of success" part. All the MPT research makes a critical assumption which is NEVER valid in real life. If there is any success, it is in spite of the research, not because of it.
The 'Perfect Storm' Just Hit Safeway Short Sellers [View article]
Do Not Let The 1966-1981 Stock Market Dishearten You [View article]
Maybe you could point out where "the opposition" said that? In THEIR words not yours?
Do Not Let The 1966-1981 Stock Market Dishearten You [View article]
Maybe if you would learn to read what I wrote, and remember what you wrote:
SOUTHGENT1951: '''Who is better off? The investor who purchased KO shares in 1998 at $42 or someone who bought at $19 in March 2009.'''
AgAuMoney: '''That is a 100% USELESS AND STUPID comparison. Nobody has invented a time machine. '''
See, I never said your comments were stupid. I said that ONE COMPARISON was USELESS AND STUPID.
SOUTHGENT1951: '''no one reading this thread views me as the stupid one'''
Your implication is certainly clear.
Do Not Let The 1966-1981 Stock Market Dishearten You [View article]
You original remark to which I responded was to BUY in 1998.
Why do you keep changing your position?
Do Performance Comparisons To S&P 500 Matter To Dividend Growth Investors? [View article]
Please tell me how you predict "maximum total return" and why you contradict the facts in your prediction with fake choices?
Please tell me for your 1000% return, which you would prefer:
a) Nothing for 99 years, 1000% in year 100
b) Plus/minus a random amount every year, eventually reaching 1000% gain only to lose it all the next year
c) Same as 'b' except every year 2% to 10% of your portfolio value returned in cash, a higher percentage in years when your portfolio is reduced from the prior year.
Do Performance Comparisons To S&P 500 Matter To Dividend Growth Investors? [View article]
What test?
Why do you post so much fake data to support your opinion?
For the real facts, see Ned Davis research instead.
Do Not Let The 1966-1981 Stock Market Dishearten You [View article]
That is a 100% USELESS AND STUPID comparison. Nobody has invented a time machine.
Do Not Let The 1966-1981 Stock Market Dishearten You [View article]
Seconded!
It is TOTALLY POINTLESS to claim MY strategy "won't work because 'most people don't save enough for retirement' because 'they simply do not make enough to save' and 'obviously talking about the less fortunate.'"
Do Not Let The 1966-1981 Stock Market Dishearten You [View article]
Or 1964 or 1972?
Do Not Let The 1966-1981 Stock Market Dishearten You [View article]
'''The average annual inflation rate was 7.06% between 1970-1979:'''
Again you cherry pick your dates to (mis)prove your point.
What was the total inflation from 1964 to 1982 as used in your KO example to which Robert was replying? About 3.11x. What was the increase in the KO dividend? 3.3x.
KO dividend wins. Your contrived example fails. Again.
Do Not Let The 1966-1981 Stock Market Dishearten You [View article]
To keep it simple and inaccurate?
Nice to pick such a good peak to start investing.
What about the dividends?
Ever considered reinvesting dividends or making more than one lump sum purchase?
The results are amazingly good when you accumulate more shares quarterly thruout the ups and downs of a bear market.
Even when you use contrived start and end dates.
Dividend Stocks Crush Gold In The Long-Term [View article]
Excellent point! I actually have debt denominated in U.S. dollars of about 20% of my liquid assets, which is considerably more than I have in cash or even sum of cash and cash equivalents.
In the "cash" sense I might be "short fiat" but since we are talking U.S. fiat, I have to include my long-term treasuries. That leaves my net U.S. fiat position at about 5% of my liquid assets and even less when I include land, etc.
Dividend Stocks Crush Gold In The Long-Term [View article]
'''I do not. But for those talking 'fiat is worthless', it would be odd of them to keep any in fiat if they really believed that. '''
Care to point out a specific example where someone is claiming "fiat is worthless" ? I see no evidence the miners you tried to use are making that claim. Is anyone?
The Peacock's Tail And Dividend Growth Companies [View instapost]
I've never thought to apply handicap theory to dividend growers, but it sure seems to fit.
Everything I look at as advantageous to me as a dividend growth investor, could at the first level analysis be a disadvantage to the company. Only by looking deeper can we see it might actually be better for the company, like a peacock's tail. Or maybe like working out...
Dividend Growth Investing - The End Game [View article]
All of that is true, except for the "research-backed record of success" part. All the MPT research makes a critical assumption which is NEVER valid in real life. If there is any success, it is in spite of the research, not because of it.