A Dying Banker's Last Financial Instructions

Discuss all general (i.e. non-personal) investing questions and issues, investing news, and theory.
KyleAAA
Posts: 8759
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:35 pm
Contact:

Post by KyleAAA »

beoba wrote:So where have you seen examples of this actually occurring?
My entire point, if you read above (and in several other threads), was that there has never been a study on this subject. There's simply no data one way or the other. Everybody is simply assuming it's true, which is silly.
User avatar
beoba
Posts: 129
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 1:30 pm
Location: East Bay, CA

Post by beoba »

So for a situation that hasn't been seen in the wild (and without any idea how it would consistently occur in practice), how does it help someone with their active investments? How does it make active investments a better deal for the little investor than indexed? This would of course be ignoring all the high-fee funds out there that give you a discount for being a big investor.

And most importantly, how does the difference in meaning between 'mean' and 'median' help me to consistently pick above average active funds every year for the next 50 years?
Last edited by beoba on Sun Nov 28, 2010 12:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
beoba | Tracking TR2050 | eqoaq | Overall ER 0.13%
shoetrip
Posts: 394
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 1:27 pm

Post by shoetrip »

KyleAAA wrote:That's really sad that he spent his last days writing a book about investing.
What is sad about doing something that u are passionate about? He raised his children into adulthood, he obviously is leaving his family with finacial means, he said he does not have a bucket list; instead he wants to leave a book that produces with his own efforts, knowledge and passion.

Why is that sad?
KyleAAA
Posts: 8759
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:35 pm
Contact:

Post by KyleAAA »

beoba wrote:So for a situation that hasn't been seen in the wild (and without any idea how it would consistently occur in practice), how does it help someone with their active investments?
Who said it hasn't been seen in the wild? Many people have certainly claimed to be able to do it. Whether or not they actually have has never been investigated.
beoba wrote: How does it make active investments a better deal for the little investor than indexed?
Nobody claimed it did. Most such individuals would pick their own stocks and not buy any actively managed products at all.
beoba wrote: And most importantly, how does the difference in meaning between 'mean' and 'median' help me to consistently pick above average active funds every year for the next 50 years?
Why do you insist on only discussing mutual funds? Mutual funds aren't the only alternative. An intelligent and dedicated small investor would almost certainly choose to avoid mutual funds.
livesoft
Posts: 75192
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:00 pm

Post by livesoft »

I didn't read the book, but the NYTimes article did not suggest this guy was recommending a basic Bogle philosophy. The author is a consultant for DFA. I got out of the article that his book is recommending a basic DFA philosophy of slice-and-dice with tilt to small-cap and value equities as well as at least 50% foreign.

Of course, many folks on this forum follow such a plan, but it ain't a Bogle philosophy.
shoetrip
Posts: 394
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 1:27 pm

Post by shoetrip »

Cloud wrote:I find it funny that KyleAAA constantly champions active management on this form and is so passionate about it too....

Think I'll add "A Dying Banker’s Last Instructions" to my Christmas list. I should get a copy for my friend who left his job at Best Buy to become a broker, or what ever you want to call him, at UBS. He makes cold calls all day trying to build up a client list so he can rob them with his management fees. He's a great salesmen and really likes his job. We discussed many times our differences in opinion on what he's really selling, but I don't fault every salesman like him. They truly believe in what they're selling, but then again, I guess when your job depends on it you must.

When people are buying actively managed funds they think they are buying an EDGE in the mkt. There is nothing wrong with that, sometimes they get what they pay for sometimes they dont. Basically they are taking on a bit more risk vs an index fund.
Say what u want but Warren Buffet is basically an active manager and his edge is he gets access to info that u or I never will and I am sure those Peter Lynch old investors would disagree with u too.


I personally do vanguard funds but i also have a risk part of my portfolio in which I basically speculate and actively trade certain stocks that I think will have abnormal returns and I must say that allocation of my portfolio is trouncing my indexed portion significantly but I am sure at some point i will take a hit and my passive allocation will outperform my active allocation.

Whether u go active or passive management, investing in the market is RISK and the recent selloff in 2007-2008 across all equity and fixed income securities has demonstrated that.
User avatar
beoba
Posts: 129
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 1:30 pm
Location: East Bay, CA

Post by beoba »

KyleAAA wrote:Who said it hasn't been seen in the wild? Many people have certainly claimed to be able to do it. Whether or not they actually have has never been investigated.
Again, how does this help anybody? What is there to discuss? Seeing a lot of weasel words here.
KyleAAA wrote:Nobody claimed it did. Most such individuals would pick their own stocks and not buy any actively managed products at all.

Why do you insist on only discussing mutual funds? Mutual funds aren't the only alternative. An intelligent and dedicated small investor would almost certainly choose to avoid mutual funds.
I was only considering mutual funds because 1) they were the subject of the conversation 2) they're the only way for the little investor to a) diversify and b) avoid being eaten alive by fees, commissions, and spreads. By focusing on mutf's, we're at least putting the little investor on an equal playing field. In the realm of individual securities, it's no contest.

And shifting the argument to individual securities doesn't help the original problem. You've got to keep consistently buying the winners and selling the losers to stay ahead, it's just the things you're now buying and selling are labeled 'stocks' or 'bonds' rather than 'mutual funds', and now they come with expenses each time you buy and sell.
shoetrip wrote:Say what u want but Warren Buffet is basically an active manager and his edge is he gets access to info that u or I never will
Keep in mind that Buffet is far more than an active manager. He actually buys the company, then goes in and cleans it up. This is far more work than merely picking a stock.
beoba | Tracking TR2050 | eqoaq | Overall ER 0.13%
KyleAAA
Posts: 8759
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:35 pm
Contact:

Post by KyleAAA »

beoba wrote: Again, how does this help anybody? What is there to discuss? Seeing a lot of weasel words here.
The term "weasel words" applies to when a claim has actually been made. I have made no claim other than that YOUR claim is unsubstantiated and doesn't follow from the logic you've provided.
KyleAAA wrote: I was only considering mutual funds because 1) they were the subject of the conversation 2) they're the only way for the little investor to a) diversify and b) avoid being eaten alive by fees, commissions, and spreads. By focusing on mutf's, we're at least putting the little investor on an equal playing field. In the realm of individual securities, it's no contest.
a.) We were discussing active management, not just mutual funds.
b.) There are plenty of brokerages offering free trades these days and spreads are going to be the same for the institutions. This argument doesn't hold water.
beoba wrote: And shifting the argument to individual securities doesn't help the original problem. You've got to keep consistently buying the winners and selling the losers to stay ahead, it's just the things you're now buying and selling are labeled 'stocks' or 'bonds' rather than 'mutual funds', and now they come with expenses each time you buy and sell.
This is the aforementioned unsubstantiated assumption.
beoba wrote: Keep in mind that Buffet is far more than an active manager. He actually buys the company, then goes in and cleans it up. This is far more work than merely picking a stock.
Actually, I'm pretty sure that's not what happens. Buffett explicitly states all the time that he isn't interested in being involved in actually running the companies he buys and in almost all cases doesn't make any changes to the existing management team. There's an invitation to buy companies somewhere on the Berkshire Hathaway website that states all this.
User avatar
beoba
Posts: 129
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 1:30 pm
Location: East Bay, CA

Post by beoba »

KyleAAA wrote:The term "weasel words" applies to when a claim has actually been made. I have made no claim other than that YOUR claim is unsubstantiated and doesn't follow from the logic you've provided.
Yes, exactly. Weasel words is an informal term for words and phrases aimed at creating an impression that something specific and meaningful has been said, when in fact only a vague or ambiguous claim has been communicated.

My claim was so unsubstantiated that I didn't even link the study from which my claim was derived:
beoba wrote:So lets say you lucked out and picked a top quartile winner for the last year. Unfortunately, the fund is 80% likely to drop out of that position by the following year. Even a mere 'above average' fund is 58% likely to be below average the next year. You wouldn't have to just be lucky once, you'd have to keep being lucky, switching between funds year after year, just to stay ahead. You'd basically need to actively manage your actively managed funds. Better call a 2% AUM fund picker to handle this!
beoba | Tracking TR2050 | eqoaq | Overall ER 0.13%
shoetrip
Posts: 394
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 1:27 pm

Post by shoetrip »

RTR2006 wrote:I read the article and was not all that sympathetic. He's been at the top of the banking industry, and in his final days repents to acknowledge that passive index investing is the way to go.

No one from Wall Street stepped forward to say that our economy was being taken for a ride, and now the situation is no different than it was before the meltdown.

I think he is looking for absolution, and I don't buy it. If he wasn't dying, I wonder how much of his wealth he'd have donated to charity by now....

:thumbsdown

RTR
Well if i recall the article did mention that he was a convert prior to finding out he was diagnosed for cancer, so maybe he was already in the midst of the process
User avatar
Taylor Larimore
Advisory Board
Posts: 30323
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:09 pm
Location: Miami FL

A dying man's message

Post by Taylor Larimore »

Hi Bogleheads:

It is unfortunate that many good deeds are unappreciated.
"Simplicity is the master key to financial success." -- Jack Bogle
User avatar
Topic Author
Munir
Posts: 2794
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 4:39 pm
Location: Oregon

Re: A dying man's message

Post by Munir »

Taylor Larimore wrote:Hi Bogleheads:

It is unfortunate that many good deeds are unappreciated.
Agree with you, Taylor. It is unfortunate that cynicism and negativism have become so prominent in our society and occasionally even in this forum.
User avatar
DRiP Guy
Posts: 2241
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 4:54 pm

Post by DRiP Guy »

KyleAAA wrote:Suppose you have a population of 30 individuals. 29 of these individuals earn $30,000 per year and 1 individual earns $10,000 pear year. The average salary of this group is just over $29,000 per year. In this case, 29 of the 30 people (over 96%) earn an above-average salary. It's a very common misconception that only half the population can be above-average. In actual fact, the vast majority can be and sometimes are. This is nothing new.

The practical parallel is that just because the giant pension funds and mutual funds can't beat the market in no way implies the majority of individual investors can't, which is EXACTLY what I see asserted in this forum time and again. That simply isn't true, doesn't make sense, and is entirely illogical.
I am somewhat familiar with measures of central tendency, and why mode for instance, can be a much more relevant measure than the arithmetic mean in some instances, geometric mean in others, and why median is the right metric in still others.

However, not to be argumentative, I don't see any of this applying to your point as relates to active management at all.

I am honestly willing to listen and be educated, but so far, I am getting nothing from your apparently heartfelt, but unfortunately vague protestations as to the goodness of active management versus passive investing.
User avatar
DRiP Guy
Posts: 2241
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 4:54 pm

Post by DRiP Guy »

KyleAAA wrote: An intelligent and dedicated small investor would almost certainly choose to avoid mutual funds.
Ahem. I have a question, and please do not be offended by it. I mean it as an earnest attempt to gain understanding of your position, and thereby perhaps understand your posts more fully.

Q: Are you a troll?

By that I mean, are you only desiring to prod others into noting possible errors or omission in their own thinking, but without necessarily having an ALTERNATE plan or version or approach that you feel is superior?

For instance, your statement above would be seen as quite provocative here at the Bogleheads board, if it were a position you took seriously, and truly believed. I think all here would be excited and interested to know that they've been 'doing it wrong', some of them for many decades now!

So, assuming your answer is "no, I am not a troll", then please, in all sincerity, tell all, with specificity and BY EXAMPLE WITH AT LEAST ONE ALTERNATE STRATEGY why: "An intelligent and dedicated small investor would almost certainly choose to avoid mutual funds."


Thanks in advance!
KyleAAA
Posts: 8759
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:35 pm
Contact:

Post by KyleAAA »

DRiP Guy wrote: I am honestly willing to listen and be educated, but so far, I am getting nothing from your apparently heartfelt, but unfortunately vague protestations as to the goodness of active management versus passive investing.
Let me set the record straight. Yet again. As I've done several times already in this thread. I am not advocating active management. I am not saying active management is better than passive management. I am saying absolutely, positively nothing whatsoever about active management. Or passive management, for that matter. I was merely pointing out the lack of evidence, either for or against, the ability of small investors to beat the market. That's all. I am not making any claims whatsoever about the effectiveness, real or imagined, of active management relative to passive management. Period. The end.

There is a somewhat appalling lack of critical thought on this forum sometimes, with everybody jumping on the bandwagon of passive management without even considering the possibility that it might not be the best approach. I also routinely see people applying different standards of evidence depending on whether an assertion is made regarding passive or active management. Opinions or assertions regarding passive management's superiority are usually accepted without much question or regard to the empirical record whereas opinions or assertions regarding the superiority of active management are usually rejected outright even though the evidence provided is far more rigorous than the evidence provided for other, more passive, theories. This is good for nobody and leads to an intellectually stifling environment where nobody learns anything.
KyleAAA
Posts: 8759
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:35 pm
Contact:

Post by KyleAAA »

DRiP Guy wrote: I mean it as an earnest attempt to gain understanding of your position
I have stated repeatedly my overall opinion that passive management is superior to active management, for the most part.

My specific point in this (and several other) threads is that if you're going to roundly condemn an entire group of people as being immoral if not outright evil for holding an opinion different from your own (read above: people have done so) you'd damn well better have a defensible position yourself. It's a "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" sort of thing.
jon-nyc
Posts: 926
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 9:02 am
Location: New York

Post by jon-nyc »

KyleAAA wrote:That's really sad that he spent his last days writing a book about investing.

As Horace Mann said, you should be ashamed to die until you've done something good for humanity. (paraphrasing)
jon-nyc
Posts: 926
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 9:02 am
Location: New York

Post by jon-nyc »

edge wrote: Seems natural to repent after a lifetime of peddling garbage.
Come on, man, he sold bonds to *institutional investors*. Even index funds buy bonds.
User avatar
DRiP Guy
Posts: 2241
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 4:54 pm

Post by DRiP Guy »

KyleAAA wrote: (snips)

I am saying absolutely, positively nothing whatsoever about active management.

I am not making any claims whatsoever about the effectiveness, real or imagined, of active management relative to passive management. Period. The end.

I.

Understand.

You have answered my question. Thank you.
User avatar
tfb
Posts: 8364
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:46 pm
Contact:

Post by tfb »

livesoft wrote:I didn't read the book, but the NYTimes article did not suggest this guy was recommending a basic Bogle philosophy. The author is a consultant for DFA. I got out of the article that his book is recommending a basic DFA philosophy of slice-and-dice with tilt to small-cap and value equities as well as at least 50% foreign.

Of course, many folks on this forum follow such a plan, but it ain't a Bogle philosophy.
The very first paragraph in Chapter 1 recommends against DIY investing. Too complicated, too many chances for behavioral mistakes.

The rest are pretty basic stuff for a typical Boglehead: stocks vs bonds, active vs passive. For a small book (under 100 pages), I think Investing Made Simple by Mike Piper aka ObliviousInvestor does a better job.
Harry Sit, taking a break from the forums.
User avatar
Taylor Larimore
Advisory Board
Posts: 30323
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:09 pm
Location: Miami FL

Strange advice ?

Post by Taylor Larimore »

Kyle:

You wrote:
An intelligent and dedicated small investor would almost certainly choose to avoid mutual funds.
Two questions:

1. Do you have any evidence to support your assertion?

2 Why do you post on this mutual fund forum?

Thank you for your response.
Last edited by Taylor Larimore on Mon Nov 29, 2010 4:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Simplicity is the master key to financial success." -- Jack Bogle
User avatar
ObliviousInvestor
Posts: 3852
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 9:32 am
Contact:

Re: Strange advice ?

Post by ObliviousInvestor »

tfb wrote:For a small book (under 100 pages), I think Investing Made Simple by Mike Piper aka ObliviousInvestor does a better job.
Thanks! :D
Taylor Larimore wrote:Kyle:

You wrote:
An intelligent and dedicated small investor would almost certainly choose to avoid mutual funds.
Two questions:

1. Do you have any evidence to support your assertion?
2 Why do you post on this mutual fund forum?
Taylor, I could be wrong, but I believe Kyle was asserting that if you're going to try to beat the market, the most likely method for success would be to do it yourself rather than using mutual funds. To the best of my knowledge, Kyle is (primarily?) a buy & hold index investor. Case in point: http://amateurassetallocator.com/2009/0 ... llocation/
Mike Piper | Roth is a name, not an acronym.
User avatar
DRiP Guy
Posts: 2241
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 4:54 pm

Re: Strange advice ?

Post by DRiP Guy »

ObliviousInvestor wrote:I believe Kyle was asserting that if you're going to try to beat the market, the most likely method for success would be to do it yourself rather than using mutual funds.
Respectfully, I see *no* such disclaimer from him, either implied or overt, so if that is his stance, he is certainly free to make that proviso more clear himself.

Do you have some reference to that kind of hedging in his post's language that I should have picked up on, but perhaps missed?

(I realize that the article at the link buttresses his aside of a claim, which you echo, that his own style favors Passive Investing, but I am not sure as to *what* to ascribe the contrary and self-contradictory nature of his posts to, and I personally do not default to any particular assumption.

Now, had the question been "What style of investing can lead to the largest and most individual cases of outsized performance gains, even almost assuredly at the expense of the larger body of investors absorbing the offsetting losses or worse?" then I would have happily and immediately conceded: "The group of strategies collectively called 'active investing'!" I would have put forward no argument whatsoever.

Thanks!
8)
Last edited by DRiP Guy on Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
KyleAAA
Posts: 8759
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:35 pm
Contact:

Re: Strange advice ?

Post by KyleAAA »

DRiP Guy wrote:
ObliviousInvestor wrote:I believe Kyle was asserting that if you're going to try to beat the market, the most likely method for success would be to do it yourself rather than using mutual funds.
Respectfully, I see *no* such disclaimer from him, either implied or overt, so if that is his stance, he is certainly free to make that proviso more clear himself.

Do you have some reference to that kind of hedging in his post's language that I should have picked up on, but perhaps missed?

Thanks!
8)
Yes, just about every other post in this thread contains the aforementioned provisos. Overtly. Context is important.
User avatar
DRiP Guy
Posts: 2241
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 4:54 pm

Re: Strange advice ?

Post by DRiP Guy »

KyleAAA wrote:
DRiP Guy wrote:
ObliviousInvestor wrote:I believe Kyle was asserting that if you're going to try to beat the market, the most likely method for success would be to do it yourself rather than using mutual funds.
Respectfully, I see *no* such disclaimer from him, either implied or overt, so if that is his stance, he is certainly free to make that proviso more clear himself.

Do you have some reference to that kind of hedging in his post's language that I should have picked up on, but perhaps missed?

Thanks!
8)
Yes, just about every other post in this thread contains the aforementioned provisos. Overtly. Context is important.
Kyle, I was editing my post while you replied to make it clearer, but I don;t think it makes a material difference to the point we are discussing here -- "What did you mean?"

Please humor me -- Consider me a simple farm boy -- could you point out ONE or TWO of those provisos, with specificity? Cause I plain old don't see it. So it IS indeed your contention that all of this thread, everyone of your replies should be read only in the context of someone who is willing to throw caution to the wind, and gamble on how to earn the largest possible return, even if the ODDS of them winning are astronomically small?

IMHO, that recasts the whole dialog, and frankly, I would not have wasted my time on such a thread. I have no interest in knowing such a result, and I suspect that if they took the risk into account, not many would.

We seem to be back at the Lotto and/or trying for the hard seven in craps, no?

So, yes, if you play the 'game' as a Passive Investor, you certainly do give up the chance to win the door prize, for the much better chance of leaving with your wallet both intact and even a bit enlarged, but enlarged only as to your portion among many. IF that was ever unclear, or if there is some class of investors that expected a Willy Wonka Golden Ticket bundled in their Passive Plan, then they would do well to know right up front, that it is not going to be there! The cost of all the golden tickets were divvied up, and distributed as dividends to the shareholders!
:lol:
bb
Posts: 326
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 10:04 pm

Post by bb »

KyleAAA,

I think you must realize most people come to this forum to
discuss investing in mutual funds so naturally the argument
involves actively managed mutual funds vs index funds.

Could you provide more detail on what your definition of
active management is. Seems like the ongoing discussion
has not been very productive because of different frames
of reference. Can you clearly summarize the point you
are trying to make by providing some specifics?


Brian
KyleAAA
Posts: 8759
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:35 pm
Contact:

Post by KyleAAA »

bb wrote:KyleAAA,

I think you must realize most people come to this forum to
discuss investing in mutual funds so naturally the argument
involves actively managed mutual funds vs index funds.

Could you provide more detail on what your definition of
active management is. Seems like the ongoing discussion
has not been very productive because of different frames
of reference. Can you clearly summarize the point you
are trying to make by providing some specifics?
Scroll up about 10 posts.
User avatar
DA
Posts: 901
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:19 pm

Post by DA »

tfb wrote:The very first paragraph in Chapter 1 recommends against DIY investing. Too complicated, too many chances for behavioral mistakes.
Well of course. One of the coauthors, Daniel Goldie, is a financial advisor in private practice. Any reader lost to DIY is a lost client.
User avatar
DRiP Guy
Posts: 2241
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 4:54 pm

Post by DRiP Guy »

BTW,

I will refrain from posting any further on this thread, to keep it from veering further towards possible argument territory. The original thrust was discussion worthy in its own right, so I apologize for any degree that my posts drove the thread away from that original topic.

8)

(And for the curious, no, the mods or someone did not contact me -- I just realized how off the path I had found myself. Sorry.)
Beagler
Posts: 3442
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 7:39 pm

Post by Beagler »

Bought it, read it. Very DFA-centric (or so it seems to me). For my money I'll take Rick's Asset Allocation book.
“The only place where success come before work is in the dictionary.” Abraham Lincoln. This post does not provide advice for specific individual situations and should not be construed as doing so.
Billy Pilgrim
Posts: 420
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 2:53 pm

Post by Billy Pilgrim »

Gawker decided to create their own guide for finance in response to this book. With laughable results.

http://gawker.com/5701625/any-jerk-can- ... ic-success
grok87
Posts: 9304
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: A poignant story

Post by grok87 »

Morgan wrote:
grok87 wrote:
Taylor Larimore wrote:
It is remarkable that someone so high-up in Wall Street never understood indexing and stay-the-course.
I think Upton Sinclair said it best: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it. "

cheers,
I've always felt that saying was far far more applicable to ideology than salary.
Here's Charlie Munger on incentives
http://books.google.com/books?id=eParwQ ... &q&f=false
cheers,
RIP Mr. Bogle.
nancy
Posts: 12
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2010 3:37 pm

Post by nancy »

Here's a simpler question: if you wanted to apply his advice to a selection of Vanguard index funds, which ones would you choose, and why?

He suggests that you divide your money among:
stocks & bonds
big & small
value & growth
domestic & foreign (he suggests 50% of stocks should be in foreign)

So, for a 60/40 stocks/bonds allocations, with 50% of stocks in foreign equities, it might look like:
30% total stock market index
30% total international stock market index
40% total bond market index
User avatar
HomerJ
Posts: 16035
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 12:50 pm

Post by HomerJ »

KyleAAA wrote:An intelligent and dedicated small investor would almost certainly choose to avoid mutual funds.
So you're saying it's possible that a majority of individual investors could beat the average return by picking stocks themselves?

You don't know that this is true, you're not saying that picking individual stocks will definitely beat the averages.

You're just saying it's possible, and none of us can prove otherwise.

Hmmm...

Have you ever tried to pick individual stocks? Do you think you're intelligent enough to pick more winners than losers over the next 50 years?

Do you think you're more or less intelligent than the average investor?

Just curious.
User avatar
HomerJ
Posts: 16035
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 12:50 pm

Post by HomerJ »

KyleAAA wrote:My specific point in this (and several other) threads is that if you're going to roundly condemn an entire group of people as being immoral if not outright evil for holding an opinion different from your own (read above: people have done so) you'd damn well better have a defensible position yourself. It's a "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" sort of thing.
Okay, that's an interesting point....

However, most of those advisors are hawking mutual funds, and there have been studies done on that.
User avatar
JeremiahS
Posts: 192
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 11:19 am

Post by JeremiahS »

Adrian Nenu wrote:
Then, further subdivide between foreign and domestic. Keep in mind that putting anything less than about half of your stock money in foreign securities is a bet in and of itself, given that American stocks’ share of the overall global equities market keeps falling.
Good advice.

Adrian
anenu@tampabay.rr.com
Hmmm.... I seem to be roughly 35% foreign. This seems to be due to my sizable REIT and Small Cap Value holdings. I am under the impression that while there are mutual funds for these asset classes in foreign investments, that their expense ratios still remain prohibitively expensive.

Any advice in this regard?
User avatar
Tyrobi
Posts: 699
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:29 pm
Location: Florida
Contact:

Re: A Dying Banker's Last Financial Instructions

Post by Tyrobi »

Munir wrote:"When Mr. Murray, a former bond salesman for Goldman Sachs who rose to the managing director level at both Lehman Brothers and Credit Suisse First Boston, decided to cease all treatment five months ago for his glioblastoma, a type of brain cancer, his first impulse was not to mourn what he couldn’t do anymore or to buy an island or to move to Paris. Instead, he hunkered down in his tiny home office here and channeled whatever remaining energy he could muster into a slim paperback. It’s called “The Investment Answer,” and he wrote it with his friend and financial adviser Daniel Goldie to explain investing in a handful of simple steps."

"So when his death sentence arrived, Mr. Murray knew he had to work quickly and resolved to get the word out to as many everyday investors as he could."
That's a nice story, and I really admire Mr. Murray's mission.

Does anyone recognize there is a lesson in this article here? If you are one of the lucky few who has recognized the truth about investing, don't wait until the death sentence has arrived before you try to get the word out. Help your relatives, friends, colleagues and strangers to find the right way now, especially when you are still young.
Three-fund portfolio | "Simplicity is the master key to financial success." John C. Bogle
User avatar
Topic Author
Munir
Posts: 2794
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 4:39 pm
Location: Oregon

Re: A Dying Banker's Last Financial Instructions

Post by Munir »

[quote="
What if you help everyone? :) Then what?[/quote]

You would have done some good in this world. You, and those you helped, would feel good about it. Don't you? :?
Calum
Posts: 153
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 9:32 am
Location: Lubbock TX

Post by Calum »

Then, further subdivide between foreign and domestic. Keep in mind that putting anything less than about half of your stock money in foreign securities is a bet in and of itself, given that American stocks’ share of the overall global equities market keeps falling.
Pardon the newb question, but if you're investing in the total market (international + domestic), why does that beat inflation? Where do the gains come from?
User avatar
DRiP Guy
Posts: 2241
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 4:54 pm

Post by DRiP Guy »

Calum wrote:...if you're investing in the total market (international + domestic), why does that beat inflation? Where do the gains come from?
Simple:

The gains based on productivity of the businesses that you own 'share' of.
afan
Posts: 5575
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:01 pm

Post by afan »

I hesitate to resurrect the active/passive part of this thread, but in response to the assertions that no one has tested the performance of individual investors vs passive benchmarks, what about Odean's publications? They seem to confirm the superiority of passive investing to the results of individuals.

Most studies investigate mutual funds because there that is where the data is. There are large databases free of bias and publicly reported. When you get to individuals, it is very difficult to get any actual data. You can find people who claim to have beaten the market, but it is impossible to know whether such claims are true, let alone what proportion of individuals may fall into this happy group.
User avatar
iceport
Posts: 4666
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 4:29 pm

Re: A Dying Banker's Last Financial Instructions

Post by iceport »

There was an interview with Gordon Murray on NPR last night. The nuggets of actual investing wisdom that were snuck into the interview sounded like they could have come straight from this forum. Unfortunately, that's not where NPR wanted to take the interview.
Mr. MURRAY: Yeah. In every single chapter, you know, there are insights and observations that really do fly in the face of everything that we've ever heard about investing. I think it's American to believe that if you're smarter or you work harder, you can beat the markets.

But, of course, after the higher turnover, the higher fees, the taxes that accompany the turnover, the opportunity cost of cash and, you know, a bunch of other reasons, I've never seen a study that shows that long-term investors can beat the markets over time.
Mr. MURRAY: There is something that happens when you have, you know, a terminal disease. And so it's actually a platform that I've taken really seriously. And in my own personal situation, I do have the peace of mind of knowing - and this is what we point out in this book - that you focus on what you can control.

You control having the right asset location, having the right diversification within and across asset classes. And the most important aspect is probably having the discipline to stay the course.
Mr. MURRAY: You know, Im feeling - it was six months ago that I was told I had six months to live. And I am - I mean after this interview, Im going to get back in bed and Ill probably sleep for a few hours. But there's something else and I hope it came through my voice.

When you have a belief system - because I've worked for Wall Street firms and heard, you know, Siegel, if you can't sell it, we'll find somebody who will. And after awhile, people know. But when you have a belief system then it's easy to get excited, because there's just a difference when you believe what you're talking about.
You can listen to the piece, or read the transcript.

--Pete
david99
Posts: 677
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:56 am

Post by david99 »

It does sound like financial infor. from this forum. It's amazing how upbeat the guy sounds considering his condition. I guess that he finally found true meaning in his life by trying to help others.
Post Reply