I have read the section on the Wiki that discusses this, and Mel Lindauer's good 2008 post here viewtopic.php?p=148439#148439, as well as the good points brought up by craigr here viewtopic.php?f=10&t=95719. However, strange things can and do happen, and with a single firm being your interface with your liquid wealth...with no SIPC applicable as discussed here...http://www.obliviousinvestor.com/is-it- ... companies/.
My philosophy has been to set things up simply, but to ensure my lifestyle would not be radically altered if one source (i.e. pension, or mutual fund manager) tanks or gets eliminated by graft or corruption, cyber intrusion, or something that hasn't been thought of yet.
I am curious what percentage feel it is OK to place everything in one place, perhaps preferring simplicity over 'eggs in one basket' concerns, thus the poll and the topic bump.
And as noted many times, folks are forced to have multiple vendors because they and their spouse are working with employer-sponsored retirement plans. There is no way to get around that as far as I can see. In those cases, one is used to working simply with a portfolio spread over 3 or 4 vendors. Perhaps it's better than playing sudoku and will keep your mind from deteriorating?
I can also appreciate that having your stuff at VG and Fido helps you sleep at night. Sleep tight.
Then in the event Vanguard's website goes down, you'll be able to survive for the next week or two regardless...
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: 2cents2, alfaspider, alshayed, atltrojan, Baidu [Spider], betternowthanlater, CFM300, David Scubadiver, Fishing50, GoFish, JamesSFO, kenschmidt, metalworking, NewbyDoobyDoo, NotWhoYouThink, patrick, pbarta, retiredjg, Sloburn, Stan Dup, Texanbybirth and 144 guests