Words of wisdom from 2006.
Printable View
You are talking about YOU and your perfectly timed investment into BRM, Snapiti.
The critical point here is about BRM being a lousy investment for its shareholders in general but great for its manager, irrespective of how badly BRM has performed - and will perform.
Anyone can brag about their great investments - eg. someone who bought TRS at 0.02c and sold at 1c, and made 500% in a week. Does that make TRS a great investment?
No, it doesn't.
But when you have BRM delivering negative returns - measured over 3 years, 5 years and from inception - it is a losuy investment especially when the manager gets paid irrespective of how badly they manage the fund.
Please don't try the old trick by changing the goal posts to deflect from how badly BRM (and for that matter, its equally smelly fishy counterpart) has performed for its investors - compared to the manager who reaped millions of dollars for fees for failing to perform.
Snapiti
I have had a look at Stocknessmonster and FT charts.They are very different from Yahoo chart.So I find myself apologising for Yahoo charts.!!! Sorry to waste your time.!
My view. Fisher funds is a way to cheaply buy a moderatly well diversified group of shares.
Some of the investment decision making in regard to Barramundi has been really bizarre and I believe the fund manager has done very well, whereas on the other hand the average investor has been served very poorly. Of course some will claim they have incredible timing, (a paid employee of Fisher Funds might suggest that for example), but any way you slice and dice this debate a fund manager deserves to be measured against its peers and I'd back Milford Asset Management any day of the week over Fisher funds. Milford's reputation has been well earned and they are well respected whereas on the other hand...