Abandoned HYPs ye entered here, now sat gathering dust (and, presumably, cash)

[Arborbridge]

Do we know if IanTHughes is having an extended flounce, been banned, or otherwise?

My understanding is that Ian has not been banned but, rather, got pissed off at the moderators. I hope he resumes posting at some time because - although he can be hard work for the moderators - his contributions on HYP are often excellent. C.

[Citation of deleted post.]

HYP idea has not worked very well for some years as most will now realise.

Well, I never knew! And I run one, too - and indeed keep detailed facts and figures which I can compare and contrast - so I think my opinion is reasonably well backed up by example.

HYP has been doing what it says on the tin, as far as I'm concerned, for the past ten years i.e.: providing a high and rising income with a good chance of capital appreciation. What more do you want, other than it fulfilling what I take to be the design specification?

That's not to say there are not better ways of getting a return on capital, and indeed much better ways, particularly if one is quite clever. But HYP wasn't dreamt up for those people who are "quite clever" but for relatively ordinary but intelligent investors.

And that also does not preclude a setback or slowdown for a number of years due to an event like Covid - this is all known and understood. But there's nothing in my view which makes "most" realise that HYP is not working. Look at the reports from TJH, myself and others, and I think you might agree with me.

Arb.

[Arborbridge]

.

i abandoned the hyp concept many many years ago after a few weeks flirtation .

(I am not allowed to say but I will anyway) I considered it but ruled it out as a flawed idea when I lurked at TMF.

RVF

This is an interesting pair of comments. In the first, the writer hasn't even tried and in the second ruled it out as flawed and seems not to have tried. So where's the experience here which could convince anyone that HYP is a "failing" concept? These are just opinions, views, assertions.

Actually, I've tried many ideas in my investment "career" both as dummy portfolios and real portfolios. The only ones which worked were Technical Analysis and HYP, interestingly they have quite different, almost opposing, ideas behind them.

TA kept me more or less safe, but HYP did what I wanted and I've stuck with it for longest.


Arb.

[Arborbridge]

But capital is only secondary, right?

Indeed. If I was trying to imrove my capital, I would hardly recommend HYP. But then, it always was for income seekers. Judge it by the purpose it was designed for, not what people imagine it was designed for.

Arb

[Arborbridge]

As regards lack of posting - I always believed the decline would happen and was probably inevitable after TMF closed the boards. There is no easy way to attract new people to TLF and that is part of the problem - TLF does not have the exposure in the market which TMF did.

So that leaves the old stalwarts who have discussed various ideas for ten years ad-nauseam. What else is there to say except post a report or chart or log and change to one's portfolio?
For those who do not do that either, there's really not much to do apart from criticise, poke fun, or occasionally add advice or company news.

Maybe that's how it should be? What is there to keep talking about with HYP - ironic, as people have pointed out, that a LTBH simple technique which deplores trading should generate so much continuing discussion.

Take Miner1000, for example. As far as I know, a classic HYPer who does nothing much except use his dividends in Spain or somewhere else in retirement. He pops in here about once a year to remind us of his existence: maybe there are others like that who have absolutely no compulsion to keep informing people of their progress. They just live the HYP. And isn't that how it was meant to be ? A simple method for producing income in retirement with much effort?

Arb.

[Dod101]

My understanding is that Ian has not been banned but, rather, got pissed off at the moderators. I hope he resumes posting at some time because - although he can be hard work for the moderators - his contributions on HYP are often excellent. C.

[Citation of deleted post.]

HYP idea has not worked very well for some years as most will now realise.

Well, I never knew! And I run one, too - and indeed keep detailed facts and figures which I can compare and contrast - so I think my opinion is reasonably well backed up by example.

HYP has been doing what it says on the tin, as far as I'm concerned, for the past ten years i.e.: providing a high and rising income with a good chance of capital appreciation. What more do you want, other than it fulfilling what I take to be the design specification?

That's not to say there are not better ways of getting a return on capital, and indeed much better ways, particularly if one is quite clever. But HYP wasn't dreamt up for those people wjp are "quite clever" but for relatively ordinary but intelligent investors.

And that also does not preclude a setback or slowdown for a number of years due to an event like Covid - this is all known and understood. But there's nothing in my view which makes "most" realise that HYP is not working. Look at the reports from TJH, myself and others, and I think you might agree with me.

Arb.

My biggest losers on the capital front, big time, are all classic HYP shares, and as I was looking over these this morning I was amused that srumpyjack was concerned about the Legal & General performance (on another thread) Those big losers are Shell, HSBC, Imperial Brands and BAT. Each one of them is showing losses over the last five years or so and each one of them into five figures of a loss. Fortunately most of the rest of my portfolio has done well (with the exception of HFEL, another story) I should probably have cut back on them at some point when they were high but what is that saying about running your profits?

Dod

[seagles]

[Citation of deleted post.]

HYP idea has not worked very well for some years as most will now realise.

Well, I never knew! And I run one, too - and indeed keep detailed facts and figures which I can compare and contrast - so I think my opinion is reasonably well backed up by example.

HYP has been doing what it says on the tin, as far as I'm concerned, for the past ten years i.e.: providing a high and rising income with a good chance of capital appreciation. What more do you want, other than it fulfilling what I take to be the design specification?

That's not to say there are not better ways of getting a return on capital, and indeed much better ways, particularly if one is quite clever. But HYP wasn't dreamt up for those people wjp are "quite clever" but for relatively ordinary but intelligent investors.

And that also does not preclude a setback or slowdown for a number of years due to an event like Covid - this is all known and understood. But there's nothing in my view which makes "most" realise that HYP is not working. Look at the reports from TJH, myself and others, and I think you might agree with me.

Arb.

My biggest losers on the capital front, big time, are all classic HYP shares, and as I was looking over these this morning I was amused that srumpyjack was concerned about the Legal & General performance (on another thread) Those big losers are Shell, HSBC, Imperial Brands and BAT. Each one of them is showing losses over the last five years or so and each one of them into five figures of a loss. Fortunately most of the rest of my portfolio has done well (with the exception of HFEL, another story) I should probably have cut back on them at some point when they were high but what is that saying about running your profits?

Dod

[/quote]

Again "capital". OK I have a similar story to you, but as they were purchased for "income" they have, mostly, provided that. OK Last year has been problematic on that front but am hoping and seeing returns to near previous levels of income (2 non-payers left MKS and BT, next February BT will come off the"naughty" step). How have your "classic HYP Shares" performed over the long term on income? That would be of more interest to this forum then a post on "capital".

[seagles]

I report my portfolio annually,

I'm not sure I even feel the need to report that often now... My own portfolio has recovered well, and doesn't really need to be fiddled with for at least the next sixteen months, and then maybe I'll give it another year. So another "full" report in 2024. Maybe. Perhaps IanTHughes and Gengulphus feel the same about theirs.

I was pondering that myself a few years back, but as every end of financial year I have to do some work on my spreadsheet to take into account "end of year" etc there was little effort (with HYPTUSS) to add a "portfolio update" on the Portfolio forum (I will stop putting a cross post from HYP though) and no longer report on my Daughters Portfolio (little happens on that since she stopped adding money due to other commitments).

I must admit that I do like to see other portfolios and what has happened over the years, both HYP and the "other type of portfolios".

[XFool]

Imho, if they don’t like HYPing, why come to this board at all.

Because they are contemplating taking a HYP approach to investing, perhaps? You should be wary of chasing people out of the village, or you might find eventually you are the only one left!

And then you will be: "The only HYP in the village!"

Sorry! Couldn't resist...

[Arborbridge]

My biggest losers on the capital front, big time, are all classic HYP shares, and as I was looking over these this morning I was amused that srumpyjack was concerned about the Legal & General performance (on another thread) Those big losers are Shell, HSBC, Imperial Brands and BAT. Each one of them is showing losses over the last five years or so and each one of them into five figures of a loss. Fortunately most of the rest of my portfolio has done well (with the exception of HFEL, another story) I should probably have cut back on them at some point when they were high but what is that saying about running your profits?

Dod

Well, whether the losses were five figures, depends how much you put in in the first place, so percentage might be a better measure. The crux is whether you think these companies will recover or be taken over one day, and in the meantime carry on paying dividends, or whether they will sink into oblivion. Considering how big these stocks are, I think its says more about the current state of the UK than it does HYP or your stock picking ability. Five years covers the disaster that it Brexit, plus Covid, remember, and considering these stocks are stalwarts of very many ITs too, one can hardly be too judgemental about this being specifically a HYP failure.

This interesting story will be what happens next, of course. I also note that the rest of your (HYP?) portfolio is doing well. HYP is not just about four shares, but the cumulative strength of all the shares taken together. Just as one shouldn't cherry pick to prove how clever we've been, neither should one pick the bitter lemons to show how badly HYP has performed.

Arb.

As a matter or interest, I noticed a similar wild story in my wife's non-HYP portfolio too. One IT have increased by around £5000 (horray!) but another share I bought her has lost £5000 (boo)

If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;

then you are an investor...

[Arborbridge]

How have your "classic HYP Shares" performed over the long term on income? That would be of more interest to this forum then a post on "capital".

I suspect the answer is that there aren't the properly calculated records to demonstrate this. Unless people keep their HYP income and capital in a separate account, or have some sort of unitising going on, it would be more or less impossible to do other than form an "impression" of what's going on. As is well known, human beings are extremely bad witnesses in this sense as we are all coloured by emotion. Without a rigidly pursued regime of numbers - such as TJH keeps - the question cannot have a clear answer and it follows, therefore, no valid conclusion.

Arb.

[onthemove]

I think the lower volume of messages from an ever dwindling number of posters on this board in recent times is a good indicator of the ‘State of the HYP Nation’.

I can't say that I monitor the number of posts on the HY boards to know either way. But what I have noticed is there are fewer arguments of the type we used to endlessly see on TMF and TLF about the strategy. And given the headaches they caused moderators in the past, it might be no bad thing if there is now less interest and passion around the topic.

Isn't that simply because the few remaining advocates wanted their walled garden here and any contrary opinions are just not welcome? If there are no contrary opinions allowed, then the engine of discussion has been turned off?

I think at the time the walled garden came about, I said it was the death knell of this part of the forum. And it is is certainly coming to pass.

It is with some irony that this discussion, I don't think, is within the terms of use of the walled garden forum.

RVF

I can't speak for others, but I've posted far less for the opposite reasons... namely there are clearly one or two posters who are clearly anti-HYP and who just can't keep themselves away.

In the real world, typically if you have an interest in something you might go along and join a society for that particular interest, where you can go along and have nice pleasant chats with like minded people, share stories, etc.

In such societies it's generally considered polite and respectful that if you aren't actually interested in the topic of the society that you either stay away and find a society that you do like, or at the very least if you're just going along just to get our and meet people, that you at least keep your anti-whatever-the-interest-of-the-group-is opinions to yourself.

Unfortunately the moderators on here don't seem to be able to establish an equivalent. It's like having the extinction-HYP-rebellion disrupting every HYP discussion.

To spell it out, it really needs the mods to use their 'moderator's decision is final' discretion, to actively bar individuals from posting on specific boards where their continued posting on those boards is clearly not constructive to the topic of the board.

The current reduced level of discussion of HYP, I would suggest, has settled at this level, because this is how low the discussion traffic needs to be so as not to provoke the anti-HYP into being disruptive again.

In the real world, if one or two people kept standing up and vocally kept interjecting to criticise and telling the group that they are wrong and wasting their time, disrupting the group from having the nice polite discussions that they want to have, well, the organisers of the club would typically ask the disruptors to leave, and bar them from entry. It's a pity the TLF moderators don't seem willing to apply the same on here.

So it just feels to me that if stick my head above the parapet in the belief that the anti-HYP brigade have gone and we can now revert back to nice polite, respectful discussion as a group sharing a mutual interest, that whaddyaknow the same suspects are just going to pop straight out of the wood work and again try to tell everyone how their interest is all wrong and that they should be doing it other ways.

And sure enough, the fact I'm even responding to this now, on this board, just backs that up - the usual suspects are clearly still here, still watching, still waiting for someone to post something pro-HYP so that you can start taking shots again.

So, I'm sure as hell not going to bother sticking my neck out and trying to have polite HYP discussions when I know that it's just going to get the anti-HYP snipers firing at me.

It's no indication at all about my continued interest, or otherwise, in HYPs.

I'm interest in running a HYP-(ish) portfolio. I'm not interested in endlessly getting into pointless, never ending arguments with people who have expressly and clearly stated they have no interest in it, and have no interest in changing their minds, and to be quite honest, I've no interest in changing their minds either... to be quite honest I don't give a monkey's if Wizard or Lootman or anyone else doesn't think HYP suits them. That's fine by me. But I have absolutely no interest in endlessly having to dodge and dive their anti-HYP sniping. So I'm largely just going to stay out of sniper's alley, because that's what this board feels like.

For what it's worth, my portfolio (largely HYP oriented, though with a few variations around the edges that aren't strict HYP)...

Just over 30% of it's current value has come from dividend returns (retained)
Just under 5% has come from capital gains

In other words around 50% total return on original capital.

But then I've always taken a LTBH approach, which is what HYP is supposed to be. So quite what people think they're pointing out what they say they've given up after a few weeks or a few months is quite baffling.

In summary... for sure, traffic on here is probably well down.

But to jump to the conclusion that it's because everyone has disappeared because they've seen the light as preached by the gospel of Wizard and Lootman, is potentially quite wide of the mark.

I can't speak for others, but my reduced posting on this board is just to stay clear of Wizard and Lootman in relation to discussions of HYP ...

I'm happy just getting on with managing my portfolio quietly myself, and don't feel there's any point in entering into discussion on here when it inevitably ends up with those running HYP's having to endlessly justify their approach to, or argue with, a number of anti-HYP people who've clearly made up their minds against the approach.

[jackdaww]

.

in fairness to the moderators --

they tended , in my view , to delete posts that had been REPORTED.

i suspect now that fewer posts are being reported , and/or those reporters have diminished their activity on the board .

[Dod101]

I hope that onthemove does not think I am one of the anti HYP posters because as an income investor I am not but I am well aware of its weaknesses and try to compensate for that by picking growth shares as well and going for slightly lower yields for my income shares. Whatever Arb says, and I appreciate his comments, the fact is that the four shares that I have cited are/were stalwarts in any HYP, but all their dividends and more has been lost by the dramatic capital losses over the last five years or so. I am of course being wise after the event, but who would have thought?

The jury is still out on what I do, if anything, and as a matter of fact, it is not because I do not want to recognise the losses. I have these losses and that is currently just too bad. My question is do I see these shares as worth hanging on to for the longer term and will there be any further dividend cuts? On balance I am inclined to think not. Imperial seems to me to be the most vulnerable.

Dod

[Arborbridge]

I'm happy just getting on with managing my portfolio quietly myself, and don't feel there's any point in entering into discussion on here when it inevitably ends up with those running HYP's having to endlessly justify their approach to, or argue with, a number of anti-HYP people who've clearly made up their minds against the approach.

Good on yer.. I would expect most HYPers are indeed just getting on with it and running HYPs which are quite successful enough for their particular purposes.

The odd thing is (and all or most of what you wrote I agree with) that we did not have this kind of problem on TMF. The people who wanted to indulge in length discussion were quite happy to do so on the HYSS board. For some reason it became fashionable here to find that "difficult" or "confusing" so those who had a particular bent decided disrupting and mocking the Practical board was fair game. Why that didn't happen on TMF is a bit of a mystery - my own view is that it was probably that the moderation was handled differently, or it may simply be that for whatever reason the disruptive element simply did not exist. (By the way, I wouldn't include Lootman in this. He provided some grit to discussions on TMF and loved and still loves a good argument, but they were always confined to the HYSS board).

Those who wanted a well ordered board got it, but at the expense of a less vibrant and entertaining one which as a result nearly died. That's what the period of needling and disruption achieved.

Anyway, I for one will continue to post when things happen to my HYP, changes results etc, in the interest of transparency and continuity - until I get too lazy to do. I certainly have no intention of giving up at the behest of a few bullies.


Arb.

[Arborbridge]

Imperial seems to me to be the most vulnerable.

Dod

As a matter of interest, Dod, I read today in the Times a list of companies which might be subject to activist shareholder shake-ups or possible takeover threats. Imperial, and B Land were mentioned.
You might sell one of your dog's and regret it if in two year's time the price jumps by even 20% due to an activist taking a stake. That what has happened to me with MRW, though thankfully, my wife still has her holding.

Interestingly, it is precisely this type of chaotic scenario that Stephen Bland was cautioning us about, and why he still believes one is better off not trying to second-guess these events but hold indefinitely.

Arb.

[Arborbridge]

I hope that onthemove does not think I am one of the anti HYP posters because as an income investor I am not but I am well aware of its weaknesses and try to compensate for that by picking growth shares as well and going for slightly lower yields for my income shares. Whatever Arb says, and I appreciate his comments, the fact is that the four shares that I have cited are/were stalwarts in any HYP, but all their dividends and more has been lost by the dramatic capital losses over the last five years or so. I am of course being wise after the event, but who would have thought?

The jury is still out on what I do, if anything, and as a matter of fact, it is not because I do not want to recognise the losses. I have these losses and that is currently just too bad. My question is do I see these shares as worth hanging on to for the longer term and will there be any further dividend cuts? On balance I am inclined to think not. Imperial seems to me to be the most vulnerable.

Dod

Small comfort, but I notice all my OEIC incomes are down too in the past year or two. In other words, don't blame yourself or HYP or write off your efforts too soon - other managers are having exactly the same kind of problem. It's only ITs which have been shielded due to their reserves, and that will catch up with them in future. OEICS are in essence reporting life "like it is" and like it is for most UK incomes too.

Arb.

[MDW1954]

Moderator Message:
A quick word on moderation, to correct or clarify some of what has been said.

* There are three moderators of this board. All are active HYPers.

* It is perfectly permissible to making passing reference to a couple of ITs that one owns -- the guidelines clearly state that.

* The vast majority of deletions are because somebody has reported the posts in question.

* Some posters think that the guidelines are far more restrictive than they actually are, eg REITs and infrastructure companies are perfectly fine.

* No one will really worry if a poster chooses to buy a few shares from the broader UK market, outside the FTSE 350.

* Enjoy the Bank Holiday weekend, everyone! -- MDW1954

[idpickering]

I can't say that I monitor the number of posts on the HY boards to know either way. But what I have noticed is there are fewer arguments of the type we used to endlessly see on TMF and TLF about the strategy. And given the headaches they caused moderators in the past, it might be no bad thing if there is now less interest and passion around the topic.

Isn't that simply because the few remaining advocates wanted their walled garden here and any contrary opinions are just not welcome? If there are no contrary opinions allowed, then the engine of discussion has been turned off?

I think at the time the walled garden came about, I said it was the death knell of this part of the forum. And it is is certainly coming to pass.

It is with some irony that this discussion, I don't think, is within the terms of use of the walled garden forum.

RVF

I can't speak for others, but I've posted far less for the opposite reasons... namely there are clearly one or two posters who are clearly anti-HYP and who just can't keep themselves away.

In the real world, typically if you have an interest in something you might go along and join a society for that particular interest, where you can go along and have nice pleasant chats with like minded people, share stories, etc.

In such societies it's generally considered polite and respectful that if you aren't actually interested in the topic of the society that you either stay away and find a society that you do like, or at the very least if you're just going along just to get our and meet people, that you at least keep your anti-whatever-the-interest-of-the-group-is opinions to yourself.

Unfortunately the moderators on here don't seem to be able to establish an equivalent. It's like having the extinction-HYP-rebellion disrupting every HYP discussion.

To spell it out, it really needs the mods to use their 'moderator's decision is final' discretion, to actively bar individuals from posting on specific boards where their continued posting on those boards is clearly not constructive to the topic of the board.

The current reduced level of discussion of HYP, I would suggest, has settled at this level, because this is how low the discussion traffic needs to be so as not to provoke the anti-HYP into being disruptive again.

In the real world, if one or two people kept standing up and vocally kept interjecting to criticise and telling the group that they are wrong and wasting their time, disrupting the group from having the nice polite discussions that they want to have, well, the organisers of the club would typically ask the disruptors to leave, and bar them from entry. It's a pity the TLF moderators don't seem willing to apply the same on here.

So it just feels to me that if stick my head above the parapet in the belief that the anti-HYP brigade have gone and we can now revert back to nice polite, respectful discussion as a group sharing a mutual interest, that whaddyaknow the same suspects are just going to pop straight out of the wood work and again try to tell everyone how their interest is all wrong and that they should be doing it other ways.

And sure enough, the fact I'm even responding to this now, on this board, just backs that up - the usual suspects are clearly still here, still watching, still waiting for someone to post something pro-HYP so that you can start taking shots again.

So, I'm sure as hell not going to bother sticking my neck out and trying to have polite HYP discussions when I know that it's just going to get the anti-HYP snipers firing at me.

It's no indication at all about my continued interest, or otherwise, in HYPs.

I'm interest in running a HYP-(ish) portfolio. I'm not interested in endlessly getting into pointless, never ending arguments with people who have expressly and clearly stated they have no interest in it, and have no interest in changing their minds, and to be quite honest, I've no interest in changing their minds either... to be quite honest I don't give a monkey's if Wizard or Lootman or anyone else doesn't think HYP suits them. That's fine by me. But I have absolutely no interest in endlessly having to dodge and dive their anti-HYP sniping. So I'm largely just going to stay out of sniper's alley, because that's what this board feels like.

For what it's worth, my portfolio (largely HYP oriented, though with a few variations around the edges that aren't strict HYP)...

Just over 30% of it's current value has come from dividend returns (retained)
Just under 5% has come from capital gains

In other words around 50% total return on original capital.

But then I've always taken a LTBH approach, which is what HYP is supposed to be. So quite what people think they're pointing out what they say they've given up after a few weeks or a few months is quite baffling.

In summary... for sure, traffic on here is probably well down.

But to jump to the conclusion that it's because everyone has disappeared because they've seen the light as preached by the gospel of Wizard and Lootman, is potentially quite wide of the mark.

I can't speak for others, but my reduced posting on this board is just to stay clear of Wizard and Lootman in relation to discussions of HYP ...

I'm happy just getting on with managing my portfolio quietly myself, and don't feel there's any point in entering into discussion on here when it inevitably ends up with those running HYP's having to endlessly justify their approach to, or argue with, a number of anti-HYP people who've clearly made up their minds against the approach.

Bravo! I’m saddened that I can only rec/thank your post just the once. You’ve named names, but there are one or two others I can think of too, but I’d rather not single people out like that because imho I could be almost liable, and I wouldn’t want to get myself or TLF in any bother.

As a footnote, I think the mods do a great job. I used to do something similar on thisismoney, and it can be a thankless task at times.

Ian.

[moorfield]

To add to what onthemove wrote and for balance there are also evidently some rather thin skinned contributors here who can be equally hard work (as csearle puts it); there are also some who may be acting within the letter of the board guidelines but (imo) not within the spirit of HYP.

Internet forums, and particularly popular ones such as this, tend to be places of robust debate rather than tea parties and that shouldn't surprise anybody really, and personally I think that's a good thing. Since IanTHughes has already been namechecked (edit: by me actually, ha ha) I would add that putting his (obvious) hyperbole and froth to one side some of my debates with him made me think carefully about how I constructed my arguments and run my own portfolio, and for that I am appreciative. He offered some "chalk n cheese" factor to proceedings here.

Anyway this thread is starting to drift away a little from my OP. To add to the fun, I may start reporting your posts if that carries on. You know who you are.

[absolutezero]

Moderator Message:
A quick word on moderation, to correct or clarify some of what has been said.

* There are three moderators of this board. All are active HYPers.

Active. HYPers.
Bites tongue