proposed TR - total returns - strategies board

[kempiejon]

=============================

yes , i am encouraged by the interest shown .

maybe there should be an arguments board ...

I can't see there being enough traction to get an arguments board going

[TheMotorcycleBoy]

Well I'll repeat myself. It seems pointless. Sorry Jackdaww! Surely all investors are aiming for a TR. Even an income based strategy requires some level of capital preservation, else the equity will dwindle, hence the validity of the entities paying that income, and then finally that income.

Hence all investment boards here would appear to be aimed at a TR. So I was *about* to suggest was to post these envisaged discussions e.g. "Mixed Bonds + Equity strategy", or "Nassim Talem Black Swan Strategy", or "John and Jane's strategy" into

viewforum.php?f=8 i.e.

Investment Strategies
Stocks and Shares ISA , Choosing funds for ISA's, risk factors for funds etc
Investment strategy discussions not dealt with elsewhere.

but on reading the boards mission statement, that would seem i) either misguided since that board *looks* to be mainly about ISAs (hence staying inside 20k per annum input) or ii) that the (on now looking at a few thread titles in that board) fore mentioned board urgently needs it's mission statement revising.

Matt

================================

most of the existing boards are dedicated to a particular sub theme - eg growth / high yield / ideas / investment trusts etc

the investment strategies board is the most general and flexible .

MOST users on here say they DO invest for TR , a TR board would achieve recognition of that .

an option is to rename the investment strategies board, to say , TR investment discussions.

But given what I've said earlier - does actually need TR putting in front? It's a foregone conclusion - you're investing - you want a TR. As for "discussions" - isn't most of what goes on in *any* forum a discussion of some kind?

If I ran this place, I'd *very* seriously consider a total rewrite of the mission statement the "Investment Strategies". I just grabbed the first handful of threads from it:

* Investing in Green Infrastructure Funds
* James Anderson of Scottish Mortgage Paper
* Insane?
* Is Value Investing Dead?
* The 2020s
* US shares

For gawds sake, remove the nonsense about ISAs from the verbage in board discussion. Then Jackdaww and us all get a general purpose place to waffle on about any strategies, err... used for investment....ahem generating a TR.

Matt

[jackdaww]

...there would be an unwanted tendency to shunt TR discussion in that direction, then I think that is a very powerful double argument against a TR-specific board.

To be quite frank, for me, shunting TR discussion to a TR-specific board would not be "unwanted", it would be a win-win for all concerned. C.

=======================

agreed.

[jackdaww]

...
but this thread is getting plenty of traffic ..

But what is it saying? I've seen this idea developing as a plat du jour, perhaps I'm missing something but it's a meta discussion about the notion of discussing the measure of total return and not strategies for how people get there. Does it indicate a desire to discuss TR on a specail board or just that people like the too and throw of their opinions.
Other posters have said that TR is applicable to most investing. I buy "such and such a quoted instrument" because... it goes up, or not, I've also had a coupon, interest, dividend it's now worth more/less on a TR basis, as opposed to say I hold cash for its liquidity and certainty but it costs me as it is eroded by inflation.
Specific boards do not necessarily draw me there but I do notice where the traffic goes.

======================

i have found the thread very interesting so far .

although i cant pretend to understand some of the (no doubt worthy contributions), a bit above my pay grade...

[jackdaww]

So what happens if a total return investor wants to talk about a High Yield Shares strategy, or a Passive Investing strategy, or a Gilts and Bonds strategy, etc? Will people still be able to do so on those boards, or will mentions of TR be declared s off-topic on boards other than the proposed total returns board, and all TR discussions corralled to it

I would have thought it should allow the discussion of everything, particularly those who wanted to discuss the relative merits of differing approaches. If a discussion became more specialised, it can be moved sideways to the specialist board without much difficulty.

==========================

i think that right .

[TheMotorcycleBoy]

Like I voiced over here:

viewtopic.php?p=308809#p308809

The solution is there for the taking. Just needs some editing of the board description.

Mods? Admins?

[PinkDalek]

Like I voiced over here:

viewtopic.php?p=308809#p308809

The solution is there for the taking. Just needs some editing of the board description.

Mods? Admins?

Couldn't agree more but these changes are rare. Have you alerted Mods/Admin (may anyway be busy given what is about nowadays)?

Not all that dissimilar to Bank Accounts Savings & ISAs where there is no strapline. I've previously suggested it should state cash ISAs or similar, if that is the intention, but, as has already been stated on this thread, there are many who come in a different way and don't bother which board they are on.

[mc2fool]

Now, your otherwise quite valid point might perhaps argue that the 'High Yield - Strategies' board maybe also 'doesn't need to exist', because there's a 'perfectly good' 'Investment Strategies' board where all of those 'High Yield - Strategies' conversations, which are currently happily taking place within it, could actually also have a 'good fit'....and there's no denying that you're 'right' - but then there's the really quite appropriate question to ask - which would perhaps be 'Which situation is likely to deliver the best outcome for those with a particular sub-interest....?', and I think it's that key question that then starts to 'perhaps' give answers that help to justify the sorts of 'sub-definition-boards' that we're really talking about in this specific thread....

Well, of course no board needs to exist, we could have all investment discussion in one mega board (and, indeed, some have argued for that!), but I think most would agree that having some compartmentalisation is useful -- and too much is not -- it's just a matter of what, when and where.

But I don't think your analogy with HYSS is appropriate. HYSS has a particularly narrow focus, a definite "sub-interest".

But as you can see from the numerous replies saying so in one way or another, total return is most definitely not a "sub-interest"! Indeed, the idea is almost risible...

[mc2fool]

an option is to rename the investment strategies board, to say , TR investment discussions.

But given what I've said earlier - does actually need TR putting in front? It's a foregone conclusion - you're investing - you want a TR.

Well actually no. There are investment strategies (of which HYP is one) that don't look at TR. They're not what most people do but they are there. Take a read of the guidance for the High Yield Share & Strategies board for example: viewtopic.php?f=31&t=8652

And, of course, if the Investment Strategies board is taken over to be the TR board then where will folks post not only non-TR strategies but also comparisons of TR vs non-TR strategies? Do we need three boards? TR Strategies, Non-TR Strategies and TR-vs-non-TR Strategy Comparisons?!?

but on reading the boards mission statement, that would seem i) either misguided since that board *looks* to be mainly about ISAs (hence staying inside 20k per annum input) or ii) that the (on now looking at a few thread titles in that board) fore mentioned board urgently needs it's mission statement revising.

I thoroughly agree that the current Investment Strategies board's strapline is, ahem, less than optimal. . How about:

Investment Strategies
General Investment Strategy discussions including comparisons between strategies.

[dspp]

Like I voiced over here:

viewtopic.php?p=308809#p308809

The solution is there for the taking. Just needs some editing of the board description.

Mods? Admins?

Mods are watching. There are many voices. There is no need for haste.

regards, dspp

[1nvest]

Dividends are just part of total return. Total return comprises one or more of price appreciation/income/volatility capture (trading/rebalancing) factors and is a means to compare the overall performance. No need for a dedicated section as it is the whole, not a element.

[Itsallaguess]

But as you can see from the numerous replies saying so in one way or another, total return is most definitely not a "sub-interest"!

I agree, and that wording was poor; the definition I really wanted to describe was one of a 'thematic interest', with that 'theme' being the strategic elements of Total Return investment.

I also agree that there might be a benefit in trying to broaden the current 'Investment Strategies' remit to help provide a route into such a specific thematic interest, that's difficult to imply from the current 'Investment Strategies' definition..

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

[TheMotorcycleBoy]

an option is to rename the investment strategies board, to say , TR investment discussions.

But given what I've said earlier - does actually need TR putting in front? It's a foregone conclusion - you're investing - you want a TR.

Well actually no. There are investment strategies (of which HYP is one) that don't look at TR. They're not what most people do but they are there. Take a read of the guidance for the High Yield Share & Strategies board for example: viewtopic.php?f=31&t=8652

Hi mc2fool

With all due respect, I believe HYP does unwittingly look at TR.

Have a read of the first paragraph of my earlier post

https://lemonfool.co.uk/viewtopic.php?p=308769#p308769

My contention is that HYP must pay lip service to capital preservation (a component of TR) since if equity (NAV) collapses, then so too does income. The recent demise of Carillion serving as an illustration.

Matt

[mc2fool]

With all due respect, I believe HYP does unwittingly look at TR.

"unwittingly look" is an oxymoron, and it doesn't matter what you believe, try telling it to folks on the HYP board and see what happens....

My contention is that HYP must pay lip service to capital preservation (a component of TR) since if equity (NAV) collapse

Nope, capital value can easily drop by 20, 30, 40 , 50% or even more and dividends remain the same or even increase. That's a central tenet of the HYP idea; capital value is sentiment, dividends are real. That companies that go bankrupt can no longer pay dividends is a statement of the mundane; it doesn't make HYP a total return strategy.

[jackdaww]

With all due respect, I believe HYP does unwittingly look at TR.

"unwittingly look" is an oxymoron, and it doesn't matter what you believe, try telling it to folks on the HYP board and see what happens....

My contention is that HYP must pay lip service to capital preservation (a component of TR) since if equity (NAV) collapse

Nope, capital value can easily drop by 20, 30, 40 , 50% or even more and dividends remain the same or even increase. That's a central tenet of the HYP idea; capital value is sentiment, dividends are real. That companies that go bankrupt can no longer pay dividends is a statement of the mundane; it doesn't make HYP a total return strategy.

==========================

a very powerful sentiment to many of us .

[jackdaww]

today i bought back into RDSB .

where would i announce this to the TLF world ?

its not raelly a strategy , more of an EVENT.

RDSB isnt really a high yield stock now .

growth strategies? - doesnt feel right .

[kempiejon]

today i bought back into RDSB .

where would i announce this to the TLF world ?

its not raelly a strategy , more of an EVENT.

RDSB isnt really a high yield stock now .

growth strategies? - doesnt feel right .

Gambling?

[1nvest]

capital value can easily drop by 20, 30, 40 , 50% or even more and dividends remain the same or even increase.

... or drop even more. 1900 to 1919 inclusive and Barclays Equity Gilt study indicates that in real (after inflation) terms, whilst share prices declined -56.5% dividends dropped -86%

Share repurchases can be as equally as beneficial to shareholders as dividends. In the US following harsher taxation of dividends many firms opted to instead use repurchasing. Such that former 4% dividends dropped to 2% dividends 2% repurchase type benefits. Just looking at dividends alone is looking at just part of total return.

[1nvest]

today i bought back into RDSB .

where would i announce this to the TLF world ?

its not raelly a strategy , more of an EVENT.

RDSB isnt really a high yield stock now .

growth strategies? - doesnt feel right .

If you were wanting to discuss why RBSB instead of RDSA - international.
If you had a specific strategic reason for the purchase - investment strategies
If just to shout out about your purchase - twitter (or if you just had to announce to TLF - Portfolio Management and Review)

[TUK020]

today i bought back into RDSB .

where would i announce this to the TLF world ?

its not raelly a strategy , more of an EVENT.

RDSB isnt really a high yield stock now .

growth strategies? - doesnt feel right .

If you were wanting to discuss why RBSB instead of RDSA - international.
If you had a specific strategic reason for the purchase - investment strategies
If just to shout out about your purchase - twitter (or if you just had to announce to TLF - Portfolio Management and Review)

Sounds like a Practical/tactical move within a high yield portfolio...So put it in High Yield Strategies.

Moderator Message:
Edited. No need to be insulting to HYPers.