sharetrader
Page 23 of 85 FirstFirst ... 131920212223242526273373 ... LastLast
Results 221 to 230 of 844
  1. #221
    Guru
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    4,876

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poet View Post
    Surely the point that Balance is making is that if you are going to pay someone to invest for you, you may as well go for the person that charges the least because the ones that charge the most don't do any better over the long term.
    And that person would probably happen to be yourself... even we as individuals can beat the index funds because however they like to skew things.. they also charge fees for looking after our funds. (and incur brokerage costs on the buys and sells they do)

  2. #222
    Guru
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    4,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poet View Post
    Surely the point that Balance is making is that if you are going to pay someone to invest for you, you may as well go for the person that charges the least because the ones that charge the most don't do any better over the long term.
    I have read somewhere (cannot remember where or when!) that most actively managed trusts did not return a better performance than passive index trackers. It also makes a difference if you invest in investment trusts (traded on the stock exchange) or unlisted unit trusts. The investment trusts can gear and therefore have the greater potential to outperform (and underperform). I guess it highlights the fact that you need to pick your actively managed trusts well. There are some that will produce a performance (net of costs) that exceed their benchmark index. For example the NAV of Henderson Far East Income Limited (HFL) which is traded on the NZX exceeded its benchmark over the past 1, 3 and even 5 years.

  3. #223
    Legend Balance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    21,487

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blackcap View Post
    And that person would probably happen to be yourself... even we as individuals can beat the index funds because however they like to skew things.. they also charge fees for looking after our funds. (and incur brokerage costs on the buys and sells they do)
    That is the point - those who can do some analysis, keep an interest in stocks and the markets, and like a bit of excitement along the way should be investing themselves as individuals directly.

    Otherwise, as Warren Buffett states, go for the low cost index funds which mirror the returns of the markets.

    Fund managers generally do well when they are managing small funds. Then they grow big and maintaining their lifestyles (from the lovely fees they get) becomes the priority.

    Schools and universities should at least teach the basics of investing - unfortunately they don't which is why most people end up with managed funds, or worse, financial advisers!

  4. #224
    Membaa
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Paradise
    Posts
    5,292

    Default

    I couldn't agree more with what you have said Balance, that is the point. Maybe I'll even buy your book someday (signed of course). The single thing that amazes me the most about investing, especially given that for most sheeple it involves putting their hard earned on the line, is why they would trust anyone, let alone pay them, to make the decisions for them? It beggars belief.

    BAA

    Quote Originally Posted by Balance View Post
    That is the point - those who can do some analysis, keep an interest in stocks and the markets, and like a bit of excitement along the way should be investing themselves as individuals directly.

    Otherwise, as Warren Buffett states, go for the low cost index funds which mirror the returns of the markets.

    Fund managers generally do well when they are managing small funds. Then they grow big and maintaining their lifestyles (from the lovely fees they get) becomes the priority.

    Schools and universities should at least teach the basics of investing - unfortunately they don't which is why most people end up with managed funds, or worse, financial advisers!

  5. #225
    Veteran novice
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    7,289

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Baa_Baa View Post
    I couldn't agree more with what you have said Balance, that is the point. Maybe I'll even buy your book someday (signed of course). The single thing that amazes me the most about investing, especially given that for most sheeple it involves putting their hard earned on the line, is why they would trust anyone, let alone pay them, to make the decisions for them? It beggars belief.

    BAA
    It's rather similar to why most people don't attempt to perform surgery on themselves. If they havn't either been around the financial world or studied finance/accounting the tendency is to rely on some "expert" to do the job for them. As Balance says, investment education is required but given the competing pressures of other subjects this is unlikely to occur.

  6. #226
    Legend Balance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    21,487

    Default

    Food for thought this morning :

    There is a massive conflict of interest here about Superlife underwriting the $3m capital raising to keep WDT going.

    We all know Superlife is owned by NZX which collects fees from WDT - listing fees etc.

    How can Superlife justify using Kiwisavers' money to prop up this failed company?

  7. #227
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    441

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Balance View Post
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ectid=10738763

    Contrast the two statements :

    "Continuing the commodities exposure available through NZX, the Clear Grain Exchange in Australia is demonstrating real momentum, with trading currently trading at four times the levels reached in the previous harvest." March 2011

    "We've got another audit committee meeting coming up in June where we will look at what the actual numbers are as against the purchase price - the business is not performing well," he said.
    "There is a substantial economic loss, there is a substantial cash flow loss in Australia." May 2011

    And as per usual, Mr Weldon is nowhere to be seen or heard as this is not good for his image. The spin machine has gone into overdrive :

    NZX chairman Andrew Harmos said it was not right to say the NZX was under investigation.

    "It is not a big, sensational matter at all. It is normal routine inquiry ... and they are awaiting the outcome of our review which we will announce as soon as it is completed."

    Accounting firm KPMG had been called in to compile a report for the NZX's audit committee, Harmos said.

    Very careful use of words. Not a big sensational thing according to the spin machine. Why then bring in KPMG to compile a report? Will the audit committee answer the question why NZX, Mr Weldon and Mr Harmos saw fit not to advise the market that the Clear grain business is not doing well. Especially when Mr Weldon sold 2m shares after an upbeat AGM and brokers' presentations.
    OK Boys and Girls its all on this coming week in the Wellington High Court. The chooks are landing over the next six weeks or so. Cross examination time will be popular. Tickets from ticketek probably.

  8. #228
    Legend Balance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    21,487

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lola View Post
    OK Boys and Girls its all on this coming week in the Wellington High Court. The chooks are landing over the next six weeks or so. Cross examination time will be popular. Tickets from ticketek probably.
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/indu...itness-warning

    So much for transparency and disclosure by the NZX - attempts to gag witnesses to a court case which will reveal the going-on's in the NZX under Mark 'my way or the highway' Weldon.

    Continuing the saga of 'One rule for NZX (ably assisted and supported by the FMA) and another rule for others'.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/7908...nally-in-court

    The best part is this : "Ralec has also sought to make an issue of the disappearance of Weldon's notebooks from the time of the deal. NZX and Weldon claims the notebooks have been lost and so therefore are unavailable for discovery in the case. In his last substantial hearing on the issue, Justice Dobson said it would be up to the lawyers in the trial to demonstrate whether the absence of the notebooks should be considered significant." Very convenient!

  9. #229
    Divorced from logic Hectorplains's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Christchurch
    Posts
    684

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Balance View Post
    Justice Dobson said it would be up to the lawyers in the trial to demonstrate whether the absence of the notebooks should be considered significant." Very convenient!
    A dog ate my notebooks, Sir...

    Catch 22 isn't it - how do you demonstrate that they'd be significant without access to them to ascertain this?

    Fascinating case. Should be some good drama ahead.

  10. #230
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    441

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hectorplains View Post
    A dog ate my notebooks, Sir...

    Catch 22 isn't it - how do you demonstrate that they'd be significant without access to them to ascertain this?

    Fascinating case. Should be some good drama ahead.
    Might just be one truth there.....he did have a dog . MRI it if the mutt is still around or if not an autopsy could be ordered.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •