Out of curiosity....it seems that you intentionally did NOT choose to go with a variable annuity. May I ask why not?
(Note--I am an advisor, and I do periodically sell VA's when I deem them appropriate, and you seem like a good candidate. I am NOT soliciting or advertising or promoting my services. Just genuinely curious.)
Search found 539 matches
- Tue Apr 02, 2019 1:42 pm
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: Just Bought an Annuity
- Replies: 241
- Views: 32615
- Mon Apr 01, 2019 10:12 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Rich Dad / Poor Dad Investing Theory
- Replies: 74
- Views: 8163
Re: Rich Dad / Poor Dad Investing Theory
You might find some value here regarding Kiyosaki: https://johntreed.com/blogs/john-t-reed-s-real-estate-investment-blog/61651011-john-t-reeds-analysis-of-robert-t-kiyosakis-book-rich-dad-poor-dad-part-1 +1 to John T. Reed. RDPD has the dubious distinction of being the only personal finance book I have ever read three times. The first time I read it, I knew absolutely nothing about personal finance. I read it, and thought that the advice sounded shady. The second time I read it, I had gone to school and had a (very) little experience working in financial services. I still thought that the advice was shady. The third time I read it, I had finished an MBA, a CPA, a CFA, a CFP, and had several years in the Personal Financial Planning and tax ...
- Fri Mar 29, 2019 3:41 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Dave Ramsey's Advice - Evaluated with Actual Returns from His Company's 401K
- Replies: 101
- Views: 17003
Re: Dave Ramsey's Advice - Evaluated with Actual Returns from His Company's 401K
This is a fabulous question. But more importantly, it is an answer.
It is an answer to that question, "Why would anybody ever visit a financial advisor?"
And the answer is, "I don't know. But they still do."
And they will continue to do so until they understand financial markets and principals." And I doubt that they ever will.
- Fri Mar 29, 2019 1:22 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Dave Ramsey's Advice - Evaluated with Actual Returns from His Company's 401K
- Replies: 101
- Views: 17003
Re: Dave Ramsey's Advice - Evaluated with Actual Returns from His Company's 401K
You’re wasting your breath. On this website, you are only allowed to chant some variation of the mantras “Saint Jack is always right” or “All advisors deserve the guillotine”. Greenman, you seem, to me, to be saying let's stop name calling? Your next sentence seems, to me, to be name calling - directed at posters on this website; am I misunderstanding you? It was a not-so-subtle dig at some of the people on here who can't seem to understand any point of view other than that of Saint Jack. They continually deride anybody who claims to give financial advice and gets paid for it, even if they don't understand the person, their model, or their clients. It was also a response to another thread, which got locked for reasons unknown to me. Somebo...
- Thu Mar 28, 2019 8:50 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Dave Ramsey's Advice - Evaluated with Actual Returns from His Company's 401K
- Replies: 101
- Views: 17003
Re: Dave Ramsey's Advice - Evaluated with Actual Returns from His Company's 401K
You’re wasting your breath.JH4P wrote: ↑Tue Sep 01, 2015 9:22 amTotally agree. I just wish people who made different choices didn't have to be vilified so often.Mike Scott wrote:And the great thing about all of this is that we each get to make our own individual choices.
The world needs less name calling of decent people as stupid/evil. There are plenty of actually stupid/evil people to go around.
On this website, you are only allowed to chant some variation of the mantras “Saint Jack is always right” or “All advisors deserve the guillotine”.
- Thu Mar 28, 2019 11:11 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: 17 out of 18 American Funds have beaten the index
- Replies: 63
- Views: 6546
Re: 17 out of 18 American Funds have beaten the index
Yes, I do sell American Funds occasionally. They're not my favorite, but if a person has a small account, or A-shares are otherwise appropriate, then American Funds is my go-to fund company. Why do I use American Funds? Simple. Because they pay me, and Vanguard does not. (At least not for A-shares. I can get paid to use Vanguard's TAMP, but the asset minimum is $50,000.) And I'm not into working for free. Does this make me an evil, greedy, opportunistic advisor feeding off the ignorance of the masses? Maybe. I don't know. But I can assure you of this--at least the clients are getting help. If they don't get it from me, they'll get it from somebody else. And God only knows what they're going to get then. Why don't I just steer them to Bogleh...
- Thu Mar 28, 2019 9:28 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: 17 out of 18 American Funds have beaten the index
- Replies: 63
- Views: 6546
Re: 17 out of 18 American Funds have beaten the index
I will answer your question if you answer mine first:
What does that have to do with anything? Whether I sell American Funds or not has no bearing on whether or not they beat an index, or are appropriate for investors, or are a good product in general.
- Thu Mar 28, 2019 8:59 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: 17 out of 18 American Funds have beaten the index
- Replies: 63
- Views: 6546
Re: 17 out of 18 American Funds have beaten the index
For never having met me, you certainly make a lot of assumptions about me.
But you are correct--I am an advisor. That is a fact.
Pretty much every other assumption is...well...an opinion based purely on conjecture. But that's neither here nor there.
- Thu Mar 28, 2019 6:54 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: 17 out of 18 American Funds have beaten the index
- Replies: 63
- Views: 6546
Re: 17 out of 18 American Funds have beaten the index
@nisiprius - They specifically mention their 18 "equity-focused" funds.
- Thu Mar 28, 2019 6:06 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: 17 out of 18 American Funds have beaten the index
- Replies: 63
- Views: 6546
Re: 17 out of 18 American Funds have beaten the index
Maybe it is, and maybe it isn't.munemaker wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2019 7:29 amWho are you responding to? Is a response warranted?Greenman72 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2019 7:21 am https://www.americanfunds.com/individua ... sults.html
I'm curious to see how those who are far smarter than me would respond to this.
But either respond or don't.
- Thu Mar 28, 2019 5:31 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: 17 out of 18 American Funds have beaten the index
- Replies: 63
- Views: 6546
Re: 17 out of 18 American Funds have beaten the index
I agree with this, but if (and that's a big "IF") 17 out of 18 funds from the same fund family all beat their index, then that's not a coincidence.White Coat Investor wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2019 7:30 am
5) Some funds will beat the market but you can't identify them reliably in advance
And as noted by others, I doubt there's much survivorship bias with American Funds. But I do agree with all of your other points.
- Thu Mar 28, 2019 5:27 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: 17 out of 18 American Funds have beaten the index
- Replies: 63
- Views: 6546
Re: 17 out of 18 American Funds have beaten the index
Of course results would have been lower if a sales charge had been deducted. That's not the point.
It doesn't bother me that American Funds charges a sales charge. That is how they pay the advisors that sell the funds, which is a normal part of doing business. That is completely different from the ongoing management fees of the fund. It has a different purpose, so the two shouldn't be conflated. (This also includes the .25% trail, too.)
- Wed Mar 27, 2019 7:21 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: 17 out of 18 American Funds have beaten the index
- Replies: 63
- Views: 6546
17 out of 18 American Funds have beaten the index
https://www.americanfunds.com/individua ... sults.html
I'm curious to see how those who are far smarter than me would respond to this.
I'm curious to see how those who are far smarter than me would respond to this.
- Wed Mar 27, 2019 7:15 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: American Funds readily available with no loads
- Replies: 30
- Views: 3165
Re: American Funds readily available with no loads
Speaking of cherry-picking dates.....Jack FFR1846 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2019 6:34 am I did a quick yahoo chart comparison of AGTHX and VTI. It comes up for a year. VTI was down 4%. AGTHX was down 14%.
Sounds great.....not.
- Sun Mar 24, 2019 4:55 pm
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: Gift tax question
- Replies: 176
- Views: 10358
Re: Gift tax question
Bump, for the guy with a 709 question.
I think I have been overly cautious. If a married couple gives away $30k, then no 709 required.
Note - I live in Texas. Community property state and no income taxes. I know nothing of the tax regime in AL or TN.
I think I have been overly cautious. If a married couple gives away $30k, then no 709 required.
Note - I live in Texas. Community property state and no income taxes. I know nothing of the tax regime in AL or TN.
- Sun Mar 24, 2019 9:36 am
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: Form 8949 - Sales and Other Dispositions of Capital Assets
- Replies: 7
- Views: 636
- Thu Mar 21, 2019 3:08 pm
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: CPA is not including form 8606 for my backdoor Roth
- Replies: 86
- Views: 8150
Re: CPA is not including form 8606 for my backdoor Roth
Let's stop arguing about something meaningless, lest LadyGeek lock the (otherwise excellent) thread.
- Thu Mar 21, 2019 10:20 am
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: CPA is not including form 8606 for my backdoor Roth
- Replies: 86
- Views: 8150
Re: CPA is not including form 8606 for my backdoor Roth
Most people have a "financial advisor" who's really just a financial product sales schmuck. These people (to the extent that they're focused on anything) are only focused on the number at the bottom of their statement--the account value. They're not accustomed to having a true financial executive who is well versed in law (tax law, estate law, business law), recordkeeping, business administration, financial markets, banking & lending, insurance, etc. It blows their mind that there's more to investing than just "the bottom line".
- Thu Mar 21, 2019 8:19 am
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: CPA is not including form 8606 for my backdoor Roth
- Replies: 86
- Views: 8150
Re: CPA is not including form 8606 for my backdoor Roth
If they don’t want to do a taxable event, then you can advise them to roll their traditional IRA back into their 401k. Then they can do a backdoor with no taxable event. Yes? Some financial advisors prefer IRAs because they get AUM fees on an IRA but not 401k. You're assuming that: 1. They have a 401k that accepts rollovers into the plan, and 2. They made a nondeductible IRA contribution. #1 isn't normally a big hurdle. But WRT #2, again, most people aren't interested in making non-deductible IRA contributions. An IRA is supposed to save you money NOW--not 30 years from now. We either get instant gratification or none at all. And as somebody else noted--I have to explain all these concepts to clients and hope they understand them and don't...
- Wed Mar 20, 2019 1:52 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: exotic ETFs
- Replies: 16
- Views: 1644
Re: exotic ETFs
IIRC, there used to be a NASCAR mutual fund. Its investment strategy was to pick stocks according to their advertising on NASCAR cars.
- Wed Mar 20, 2019 1:02 pm
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: CPA is not including form 8606 for my backdoor Roth
- Replies: 86
- Views: 8150
Re: CPA is not including form 8606 for my backdoor Roth
If they don’t want to do a taxable event, then you can advise them to roll their traditional IRA back into their 401k. Then they can do a backdoor with no taxable event. Yes? Some financial advisors prefer IRAs because they get AUM fees on an IRA but not 401k. You're assuming that: 1. They have a 401k that accepts rollovers into the plan, and 2. They made a nondeductible IRA contribution. #1 isn't normally a big hurdle. But WRT #2, again, most people aren't interested in making non-deductible IRA contributions. An IRA is supposed to save you money NOW--not 30 years from now. We either get instant gratification or none at all. And as somebody else noted--I have to explain all these concepts to clients and hope they understand them and don't...
- Wed Mar 20, 2019 8:20 am
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: CPA is not including form 8606 for my backdoor Roth
- Replies: 86
- Views: 8150
Re: CPA is not including form 8606 for my backdoor Roth
@Greenman72, so in real life, you don't advise your clients to make Roth conversions? Or in reality, you don't have clients that need to have Roth conversions suggested to them? In practice, most people who come to a CPA want to keep their taxes as low as possible. Roth Conversions (whether they be wisdom or folly) don't keep taxes as low as possible. They incur taxes unnecessarily (at least in the client's eyes). There are times when Roth Conversions make a lot of sense. EG (I live in oil country) in 2015, a lot of people lost a lot of money, because they drilled a lot of wells in 2015 (right before the price crash). Therefore, their income in 2015 was artificially low (some even had negative income), so 2015 would have been an opportune ...
- Mon Mar 18, 2019 9:11 pm
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: CPA is not including form 8606 for my backdoor Roth
- Replies: 86
- Views: 8150
Re: CPA is not including form 8606 for my backdoor Roth
As noted in another thread, if you asked me questions like this in an introductory meeting, I will peg you as a high maintenance PITA and charge you accordingly.livesoft wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 12:17 pm This thread suggests that anyone contemplating paying for tax prep services should ask them how many Form 8606's do they fill out every year before they hire that preparer. That's a simple knowledge question that will weed out some imbeciles whether one actually needs to use a Form 8606 or not.
One might also ask how many Form 1116's they fill out, too.
- Mon Mar 18, 2019 9:05 pm
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: CPA is not including form 8606 for my backdoor Roth
- Replies: 86
- Views: 8150
Re: CPA is not including form 8606 for my backdoor Roth
I didn’t read all replies, so sorry if this is already covered. (Note - I’m a cpa and an advisor.) in order to be fair, Form 8606 is so rarely seen, I don’t think I’d be able to fill one out correctly without some pretty intense research. I’ve been in tax prep for 8 years, and I can count the number of 8606’s I’ve done on one hand. Actually, I don’t know if I’ve ever done one. Just heard about them and know what they’re for. In real life, people want tax deductions. If they can’t grt a deduction, they won’t make an IRA contribution. And again, in practice, I just don’t see people ever doing Roth conversions. I see how it is good in theory, but in practice, it rarely happens. So just because a CPA doesn’t do the 8606 right doesn’t make him a...
- Sat Mar 16, 2019 12:01 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: What % of FA's add value?
- Replies: 14
- Views: 913
What % of FA's add value?
This thread somewhat builds on vineviz's "are financial advisors more reasonable than their clients?" https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=275805 (Full disclosure - I'm an advisor and a tax preparer, so I see a lot of other advisors' work.) I realize that this is a biased audience, but I value the opinions of some of the regulars. I'm curious as to how many financial advisors are providing any real value to their clients? From what I can tell, it's about 5-75-20. That is, about 5% of advisors are actually providing real value to their clients. They are helping the clients come up with clear financial goals, achieve those goals, investing assets well (and tax efficiently), helping clients solve difficult financ...
- Sat Mar 16, 2019 10:36 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Are financial advisors more reasonable than their clients?
- Replies: 23
- Views: 2637
Re: Are financial advisors more reasonable than their clients?
As luck would have it, I found the 15 attributes--none of which are qualified or quantified. (Maybe intentionally so.) 1. Helps me stay in control of my emotions 2. Has a good reputation and positive reviews 3. Is knowledgeable on tax consequences of investing 4. Can help me maximize my returns 5. Is approachable and easy to talk to 6. Helps me reach my financial goals 7. Is easy to get a hold of 8. Has a clear fee structure so I know what I'm paying for 9. Understands me and my unique needs 10. Uses up-to-date technology 11. Acts as a coach/mentor to keep me on track 12. Presents themselves in a professional manner 13. Keeps my interests in focus with unbiased advice 14. Communicates and explains financial concepts well 15. Has the relevan...
- Sat Mar 16, 2019 10:32 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Are financial advisors more reasonable than their clients?
- Replies: 23
- Views: 2637
Re: Are financial advisors more reasonable than their clients?
Disclosure - I'm an advisor. I don't really like the underlying "philosophy" of the article. It seems like the answers are too vague to actually mean anything. "My #1 priority is to help clients meet their financial goals." This statement has no value. It's as useless as my doctor saying "my #1 priority is your health", or an ambulance-chasin' lawyer saying "my job is to fight for you and your family". These statements are meaningless "truths" that apply 100% of the time to 100% of the people. Similarly, the statement "communicates and explains financial concepts well" has no definition and can't be quantified in any meaningful way (IMHO). You're talking about clients who know abso...
- Wed Mar 06, 2019 12:20 pm
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: Diversifying against your "natural" capital
- Replies: 11
- Views: 1165
Re: Diversifying against your "natural" capital
^It occurred to me that you may be mistaking "publicly traded oil and gas stocks" for "privately owned oil and gas royalties and mineral rights".
While I don't have any idea how to value mineral interests and royalties, I imagine that their return would be vastly different from the S&P 500 (or whatever other market index you want to use).
While I don't have any idea how to value mineral interests and royalties, I imagine that their return would be vastly different from the S&P 500 (or whatever other market index you want to use).
- Tue Mar 05, 2019 8:23 am
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: Diversifying against your "natural" capital
- Replies: 11
- Views: 1165
Re: Diversifying against your "natural" capital
Perhaps you have a little jealousy of these people and their success? Oh, there's no doubt about that. I did a tax return for an O&G partnership last week. Guy moved to West Texas from NYC in 1962 and started buying mineral interests. Those mineral interests started producing minerals, and some 57 years later, they made $15m in net revenue between the 25 partners. (Great-grandkids and what not.) So these people are cashing checks of anywhere between $200k and $1.4m, and they did absolutely nothing to earn that money--they just picked their great-grandpa wisely. (Believe it or not--this is fairly common out here.) But that's neither here nor there. I'm curious about your first paragraph. Why do you think a standard 60/40 portfolio would...
- Mon Mar 04, 2019 4:49 pm
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: Diversifying against your "natural" capital
- Replies: 11
- Views: 1165
Re: Diversifying against your "natural" capital
A couple more things that came to mind: Yes, I realize how self-serving this is. "Sell your oil & gas that I can't monetize, and invest in in a way that I will get paid on it." That notwithstanding, I still believe that it's good advice. Also, most people out here don't realize exactly how much they have invested in oil and gas. If the industry goes south, they are forfeiting their current income (in the form of lower production AND lower prices), but they're also foregoing any future capital appreciation. Additionally, any non oil & gas assets that are based in West Texas will certainly plummet (real estate, privately-held businesses, etc.) Not only that, but the entirety of their intellectual capital will be worthless. (...
- Mon Mar 04, 2019 4:41 pm
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: Diversifying against your "natural" capital
- Replies: 11
- Views: 1165
Diversifying against your "natural" capital
OK. Here's the scoop: First - a little about me - I'm a CPA in a tax practice and also have a fledgling financial advisory practice. It does integrated wealth management, including advice on estate planning, intergenerational wealth transfers, recordkeeping & payroll, insurance (of all types), etc. I also happen to live in West Texas, where there are a whole lot of very wealthy people. (As evidenced by this WSJ article. https://www.wsj.com/articles/in-this-oil-boom-town-even-a-barber-can-make-180-000-11551436210) And there are a lot of people making a lot of money on oil and gas--especially now that we are 15 years into a prolonged oil boom. The problem is--we live in a largely undiversified economy. As oil prices (and mineral interest ...
- Sat Feb 16, 2019 5:22 pm
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: tax deduction for vehicle donation
- Replies: 13
- Views: 727
Re: tax deduction for vehicle donation
Look up the instructions for form 8283 and tell us what you find.
- Sun Feb 10, 2019 9:40 pm
- Forum: Personal Investments
- Topic: Marital Trust - Income Not Wanted
- Replies: 2
- Views: 480
Re: Marital Trust - Income Not Wanted
An Investment only variable annuity. Full market participation with zero taxable income.
- Fri Feb 08, 2019 4:11 am
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: Living Trust, Living Hell
- Replies: 9
- Views: 4098
Re: Living Trust, Living Hell
Agreed with above.
The primary reason to use them is to avoid probate. So in a state like Texas, the probate process is so easy that they’re mostly useless. However, in a state like California, it would almost be malpractice for a lawyer to NOT recommend one.
The primary reason to use them is to avoid probate. So in a state like Texas, the probate process is so easy that they’re mostly useless. However, in a state like California, it would almost be malpractice for a lawyer to NOT recommend one.
- Fri Feb 01, 2019 12:47 pm
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: Life Insurance for Dummies?
- Replies: 19
- Views: 1305
Re: Life Insurance for Dummies?
I'm really not sure why this matters at all.
Yes--if you buy a product, any kind of product, then somebody out there is making money on it. That has nothing to do with whether or not it is the right product for you.
- Fri Feb 01, 2019 12:26 pm
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: Life Insurance for Dummies?
- Replies: 19
- Views: 1305
Re: Life Insurance for Dummies?
FYI - I'm an advisor and an insurance agent. This is what I'd tell you if you were my client:
Find a 25- or 30-year term product. Your premium will be higher than it would if you only bought 10-year term, but it guarantees that you will have life insurance for the next 30 years. Then hopefully by the time you're 62 or 67, you won't need the life insurance anymore.
The cheapest places to start will be your work, then a trade organization (like the AICPA for us CPA's). If you don't have any of the above, go to your friendly insurance salesman and ask them for some quotes. The two insurers I have used in the past are Principal and Prudential.
Find a 25- or 30-year term product. Your premium will be higher than it would if you only bought 10-year term, but it guarantees that you will have life insurance for the next 30 years. Then hopefully by the time you're 62 or 67, you won't need the life insurance anymore.
The cheapest places to start will be your work, then a trade organization (like the AICPA for us CPA's). If you don't have any of the above, go to your friendly insurance salesman and ask them for some quotes. The two insurers I have used in the past are Principal and Prudential.
- Sun Jan 27, 2019 8:51 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Vanguard stole $0.01?
- Replies: 80
- Views: 8684
- Fri Jan 25, 2019 11:03 am
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: Appropriate allocation of Church funds
- Replies: 30
- Views: 2800
Re: Appropriate allocation of Church funds
From one Christian to another, another thing I'd add--church harmony is more important than money (at least to a certain extent). I wouldn't push it too far, unless you think that somebody is egregiously enriching himself at the church's expense. And as I said before, I'm an advisor, and my standard fee for AUM is 1% of assets less than $2m, and .5% of assets above that. However, for my church, I would probably heavily discount it. (This is my business and my personal preference.) I don't think that it's necessarily improper for the advisor to charge a fee (since he is, at least in theory, providing some sort of value and can be sued for malpractice). The actual amount of the fee is subject to much personal opinion, but I'm not 100% against...
- Fri Jan 25, 2019 9:33 am
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: Appropriate allocation of Church funds
- Replies: 30
- Views: 2800
Re: Appropriate allocation of Church funds
I am the assistant treasurer and business administrator of my church. (That is a part-time job for my church, which is relatively small--about the same size as yours.) I am a CPA/PFS and CFA. The Treasurer is a CPA. Other members of the finance committee are also professionals who work in bookkeeping or accounting. I would ASSUME (you know what happens when you do that) that your finance committee is similar. If it is not, then you have bigger problems. I don't really have a whole lot to add to what others have said. Basically, you've said your piece, so just leave it there. About the Ameriprise advisor: I have stated on BH that I am an advisor (as part of a bigger tax/accounting/wealth management practice), but I am generally hyper-critica...
- Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:59 pm
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: Article of John Bogle
- Replies: 10
- Views: 1167
Re: Article of John Bogle
Perhaps if Bogle had realized he was giving up $10 billion by adopting a mutual structure when he set up Vanguard, he would have done it differently at the time. Once such a decision is made, it is hard to undo. Good God, does the author understand nothing? Does he not understand that Jack knew exactly what he was doing setting up the company the way he did. Does the author not understand Jack knew about "Enough" (enough to write a book titled "Enough")?? Jack's own regret of not earning $10 billion "is that I don't have more to give away." I actually agree with the author on this (at least on some level). That is--society is willing to pay $10 billion for what JB had to offer. He settled for $100 million. (I'...
- Sat Jan 19, 2019 9:47 pm
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: How to Get Competitive Quotes on O&G Tax Prep Fees
- Replies: 17
- Views: 1338
Re: How to Get Competitive Quotes on O&G Tax Prep Fees
Agreed. You sound worse than an engineer.Gill wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 10:27 amYup.Beatle Boots wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 10:18 am I am sure practioners are rolling their eyes, this guy is a pain in the butt.
Gill
- Fri Jan 18, 2019 2:32 pm
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: How to Get Competitive Quotes on O&G Tax Prep Fees
- Replies: 17
- Views: 1338
Re: How to Get Competitive Quotes on O&G Tax Prep Fees
I don't see any reason why CPA / Accountant service fees should NOT be "market based competitive". What makes these professional service providers so special? If they don't want to give me an up front quote, that is fine, but some of them will. I don't think this is an unreasonable ask nor do I think Tax CPA or Accountants are "special". Example: I went to the dentist a couple of weeks ago for my exam. Unfortunately the dentist found that half of a back tooth had fallen off and a cavity had popped up in the remaining portion. I assume a portion of this work was "custom" or unique to the situation of my mouth (similar to my O&G taxes). The Dentist quoted me a fixed rate to fix the cavity. I was free to acce...
- Fri Jan 18, 2019 2:13 pm
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: How to Get Competitive Quotes on O&G Tax Prep Fees
- Replies: 17
- Views: 1338
Re: How to Get Competitive Quotes on O&G Tax Prep Fees
I came up with the following methodology. Please critique me or offer alternative solutions. Obtain a single hard copy all of my 2016 tax returns. Go thru and redact my name, social security numbers, O&G owner Interest numbers, name and contact info for the 2016 accountant, etc. Find all the local CPA and Accountants etc., that advertise experience in O&G taxes. Walk into their brick & mortar office and tell them I am obtaining competitive quotes for annual tax preparation services. Assuming they are interested, I ask them to look at returns (containing copies of supporting documents which are mostly 1099s, ammortization schedules, etc.). I tell them I do not want them to retain a copy of my taxes for their records. I ask them ...
- Mon Jan 14, 2019 9:45 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Investment advisors- is regulatory burden higher on fiduciaries?
- Replies: 54
- Views: 3357
Re: Investment advisors- is regulatory burden higher on fiduciaries?
They don’t need to pay it. But they are going to pay it—either to me or to another advisor. They might as well pay me.venkman wrote: ↑Thu Nov 15, 2018 11:19 pmAnd why do your clients need to pay a 1% AUM fee for a low-turnover portfolio model that could likely be maintained with an annual rebalance, which would require an hour or two of your time and expertise, charged at an appropriate hourly rate?Greenman72 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 15, 2018 9:10 am You could whoop and holler all day about my exorbitant, outrageous, criminal 1% fee. But the fact is--these people are going to pay somebody. They might as well pay me, because I at least know what I'm doing.
Again—my clients are not DIY’ers. If they want to do it themself, they wouldn’t come to me.
- Wed Jan 09, 2019 9:21 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Do fees matter? (SPIVA Institutional Scorecard)
- Replies: 0
- Views: 278
Do fees matter? (SPIVA Institutional Scorecard)
Edit - my apologies. I intended to post the most recent data, but just realized that I only had 2017 available. Nonetheless, here's the 2016 data, which is two year out-of-date.
https://us.spindices.com/documents/rese ... debate.pdf
https://us.spindices.com/documents/rese ... debate.pdf
- Wed Jan 02, 2019 3:12 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Annuities objectively considered
- Replies: 136
- Views: 17402
Re: Annuities objectively considered
But in my mind, that’s still better than giving up complete and total control of your money, cosindering that the SPIA only paid 0.6% more over the course of a lifetime. Really? You think it is worth spending 8.45% of her monthly payout for the option to take excess withdrawals that would reduce her benefit base and guaranteed withdrawal amount pro-rata? Really?! Ron Question for you: Client #1 puts a million dollars in an SPIA. Straight life. No guaranteed period. She annuitizes the contract on January 1, and dies on January 2. What is her IRR? (Answer = -100%) Client #2 puts a million dollars in a high-priced, high-commission, oversold VA with a 6.5% GMWB. Straight life. No guaranteed period. She starts taking 6.5% income (NOT an annuiti...
- Fri Dec 28, 2018 11:02 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Annuities objectively considered
- Replies: 136
- Views: 17402
Re: Annuities objectively considered
I priced an annuity for a 72 year-old woman a few weeks back. A SPIA would have paid her 7.1%, in exchange for her giving up complete and total control of her money. The evil, geeedy, life-sucking, bloodthirsty variable annuity company would have paid her a guaranteed 6.5%, without the need to annuitize. She would have still had reasonable control of her money, possibility for gains (even while taking guaranteed income), possibility of increases in guaranteed income (due to a a high-water-Mark lock-in on the GMWB) and a guaranteed death benefit of 100% of her premium (less any withdrawals). Yes—this comes at a price—A de-facto 2.6% AUM fee, plus the fees on the underlying investments. But in my mind, that’s still better than giving up compl...
- Wed Dec 19, 2018 10:41 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Question on DFA's overall theory....
- Replies: 18
- Views: 1858
Re: Question on DFA's overall theory....
TAMP = Turnkey Asset Management Platform. Basically, you give them all the money and they put it in a predefined asset allocation model, usually using ETF's or mutual funds. EG - Vanguard's TAMP has 10 models - 100% equity, 90% equity, 80% equity, etc. They all use the exact same ETF's--only the allocation differs. In this case, the equity % is divided up into 50% to S&P 500, 10% to the "extended market", and 40% to Total International. The Fixed Income portion is divided up similarly. Cons - They are extremely inflexible, and it's hard to do any kind of "advanced planning" with them. Consider this - As soon as you give them the cash (or transfer in assets), they immediately convert it into their predefined asset all...
- Wed Dec 19, 2018 9:24 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Question on DFA's overall theory....
- Replies: 18
- Views: 1858
Re: Question on DFA's overall theory....
@Taylor and Elysium: Let me tell you where I'm coming from: I am actually an advisor (a Bogleheaded-minded advisor, but an advisor nonetheless), and I've been hounded by a couple of third-party money managers who use DFA in their TAMPs. They want a piece of the pie. Traditionally, for all taxable portfolios, I have used Vanguard, who basically uses Taylor's 3-fund portolio as their platform. (In practice, they actually break the three funds up into nine funds, but they are still are market-cap weighted, so the underlying is pretty much the same. And their allocation to foreign equity is 40% instead of Taylor's 20%. And they do add a 30% international bond exposure, which I don't care for, but don't care enough to argue with either.) They re...
- Tue Dec 18, 2018 4:55 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Question on DFA's overall theory....
- Replies: 18
- Views: 1858
Question on DFA's overall theory....
DFA theory seems to be really heavy into tilting toward small-cap equities in their equity mutual funds. On the other hand, Boglehead theory says to own the entire market using market-cap weights. This means that DFA is moving farther to the northeast on the risk/return quadrant--making their shareholders take more risk in the hopes of higher return. However, most clients also have a fixed-income portion of their return. For the vast majority of investors, this fixed income portion is supposed to act as a ballast for the equity portion. It moves the overall portfolio back to the southwest on the risk/return quadrant, thereby reducing risk and expected return. That said, for anybody who's not 100% equities, I'm inclined to believe Boglehead ...