My absence

[dealtn]

Discussing three HYP shares, where else would it go?

Share Ideas.

Pretty much sums it up in just 2 words, no?

[richfool]

My only takeaway from this thread is that Gengelphus is a key contributor to this forum and we are all the better for his presence.

Or was his OP just another excuse for yet another debate about HYP and HYP Practical boards?


I really don't know why HYP (strict) doesn't have it's own "HYP Club" board, with special membership. Then all the strict HYP'ers can discuss their tightly controlled subject matter, to their hearts content, without let or hindrance by those who either don't fully understand their doctrine, or innocently blunder in to that cult domain.

Currently it is sad that posters cannot discuss the performance of shares without the topic invariably ending up on the HYP Practical board, and then only if it has a yield equal to or greater than the average of the FTSE 100 index. To use the "Share Ideas" board, seems to restrict the discussion to that one stock only, without any broader comparisons.

The slant towards HYP seems to permeate so much on these boards, to the extent that even discussions about Investment Trusts, whilst taboo on the "HYP - Practical" board, seem to end up on "High Yield Shares & Strategies" board, rather than being on the far more sensible and logical "Investment Trust & Unit Trusts" board.

[Alaric]

Or was his OP just another excuse for yet another debate about HYP and HYP Practical boards?

142 posts and counting. Having written or rewritten the guidance for the TMF Board, it does seem the OP like some other posters has an emotional attachment to both HYP Strategy, whether singular or plural. and the accompanying edicts about what it might be and what can and cannot be discussed.

I really don't know why HYP (strict) doesn't have it's own "HYP Club" board, with special membership. Then all the strict HYP'ers can discuss their tightly controlled subject matter, to their hearts content, without let or hindrance by those who either don't fully understand their doctrine, or innocently blunder in to that cult domain.

Agreed. If strict HYP'ers want to evangelise, they will have to accept criticism of the flaws in their approach.

[miner1000]

I think this thread has gone the way of many before it. It starts off with a serious point of discussion. Then follows reasonable comment and questioning, which eventually descends into arguments over points of principle, and we end up with a hundred plus comments, some completely off topic, and which are far too many to get through at a single sitting.

We all know the guidelines. I am with Dod on this one. Do not post a reply unless you think it will add a useful contribution or clarification to the OP. If someone makes a negative, divergent or argumentative response - Ignore it. Don't be dragged into the mud. People are entitled to their opinion but do not need to be responded to unless asked, and even then only half of the time .

A good tip is to only look at the board once or twice a week. we can all see where a thread has gone off at a tangent. That is the time to stop reading and go stack the dishwasher.

Try to maintain a sense of humour at all times.
Miner

[Arborbridge]

I am a genuine HYPer and try in my own fallible human way to keep to the guidelines - I think I do that pretty closely, along with the practical additions which we have developed over the years to increase the safety side of things. But my HYP is a genuine HYP which started by following Stephen Bland's writings at the time of HYP4 along with allowable modifications, but not including investments other than ordinary conventional shares.
Arb.

I don't doubt you have genuine intent. But who are the "we" that get to decide those "practical additions" and "allowable modifications"? Is it by invitation only or can anyone chip in?

Yes, I see no reason why you shouldn't chip in, but bear in mind modifications have all been within the spirit of the guidelines and any that aren't wouldn't be seen as serious contenders. In other words, the basic character of HYP should not be altered, although some would no doubt call the current variations, controversial. If you want to be "strictly Pyadic" you would think any change was taboo, but those which "catch on" presumably are agreed to by enough people to make them acceptable. As far as I know, the majority changes have turned on practical management issues, usually to enhance safety or perhaps one should say - perceived safety. HYP. Someone said recently, is a broad church (personally, I'd say it was a niche, a subset of HY investing, which itself is a subset) and although it has some flexibility, if we allow too much mission creep, it would cease to be HYP.

The current board guidelines are the ones we have to play to, and they were laid down by the organisers who had experience and knowledge of HYP, not lower order lemons like me. But in my view, they do seem to fairly reflect HYP as I know it, but as Gengulphus has rightly pointed out there remain some problems.

Arb.

[IanTHughes]

Those that post upon the “High Yield Portfolio (HYP) – Practical” board mostly fall into one of four groups

1) Prima Donnas

Prima Donnas do not actively reject the HYP Strategy, in fact they say little, if anything at all about it. They need an audience to listen to the buys and sales that they make for what is most likely a trading strategy. They never discuss the practicalities of running an HYP, how could they when they do not maintain an HYP. They crave the attention of people to see how clever they have been with their trading and of course for that reason want the “High Yield Portfolio – Practical” board to continue. Hence Prima Donnas

2) William Webbs

William Webbs do usually have some kind of income strategy and may even have an equity portfolio for the purpose of generating income. They do however reject the HYP Strategy in that they want to change the HYP strategy so that it matches the strategy that they do actually follow. Like William Webb they have happily joined a football club but, as soon as they are in, they bang on about changing the rules of the game. One would still be allowed to kick the ball but how about: adding 4 more players, allowing people to run with the ball in hand, changing the goal posts, changing the way points are scored? And of course, they want to change the name to Rugby Football, to be more inclusive you understand. They want to destroy HYP as a strategy, but they do want to keep the “High Yield Portfolio – Practical” board, but for their own strategy

3) Aryans

Aryans believe that HYP should be banned in favour of a proper strategy, one that measures success by Total Return, the correct way you understand! They of course routinely attack HYP as a strategy usually by attacking some aspect that they claim will inevitably lead to disaster. The fact that the “aspect” they attack is not part of the HYP Strategy is of no matter, not when they are engaged in what they see as the noble mission of freeing all investors from what they perceive to be an HYP scourge. They of course want the “High Yield Portfolio – Practical” board banned, or at least banished to an area where it should no longer infect other investors.

4) HYPers

HYPers, and I am of course one of this group, simply want to build and manage their income portfolios by using the HYP Strategy as laid out by its originator. They accept that HYP does not have rules but does come with strong recommendations. Further, they understand that the strategy requires each individual HYPer to put those recommendations into practice in his/her own way and make his/her own investment decisions. This in turn leads to an understanding that, although there will be overlap, each HYP will be unique, chosen by its owner and no-one else. They want the members of the other poster groups to be politely but firmly told to leave the HYP Strategy and HYPers alone. And of course, HYPers want the “High Yield Portfolio – Practical” board to be returned to its original purpose: the discussion of the practicalities of running an HYP.


Ian

[richfool]

As a postscript to my above post, I was too late to edit it.

For someone who wants to discuss IT's, Investment Coys, Property Coys, REIT's be they high yielding, or low yielding, or growth focussed, it becomes a confusing nightmare.

For example, - PHP (a property company) gets discussed under HYP Practical (!), but what about REIT's? They can't? If REIT's can be discussed, then what about IT's. Note that some IT's are not actually IT's but Investment companies. What about IT's investing in renewables?

Then some post about higher income IT's on the High Yielding Shares & Strategies board, but lower yielding IT's not allowed. Logic to me says IT's (regardless of yield) should be on the IT board. Or is that too simple and too logical!

It always puzzled me, on the old Motley Fool boards, that L'Universal would post annual reports of particular income focussed Investment Trusts on the board about "Income shares", rather than the board specifically set up for Investment Trusts. Is there something taboo about Investment Trusts, or are they considered to be low class by HYP'ers?

Yours frustrated.

[dealtn]

I really don't know why HYP (strict) doesn't have it's own "HYP Club" board, with special membership. Then all the strict HYP'ers can discuss their tightly controlled subject matter, to their hearts content, without let or hindrance by those who either don't fully understand their doctrine, or innocently blunder in to that cult domain.

I see "www.hyp.co.uk" is available

[PinkDalek]

To use the "Share Ideas" board, seems to restrict the discussion to that one stock only, without any broader comparisons.

Are you confusing Share ideas - Discuss Shares, buying selling, tips and deals with Company Share news (LSE Main Market) - Share latest information on individual companies and hot news discussions. LSE Main Market companies only.

The former regularly has composite post about numerous companies in MrC's Smallcap Sweeps.

For example, - PHP (a property company) gets discussed under HYP Practical (!), but what about REIT's? They can't?

REITs are acceptable on High Yield Portfolios (HYP) - Practical per the combined Board Guidance viewtopic.php?f=31&t=8652.

[Dod101]

Actually PHP is a REIT, as anyone who has received their dividend today will note.

Dod

[tikunetih]

Something I've observed on various forums over the years, both financial and on-financial, is the example of the seemingly thin-skinned, popular contributor who periodically flounces off because some aspect of the forum isn't to their liking only to return later when they miss the positive feedback they used to get from those who valued their posts...

In my view, forums that work well and avoid becoming navel-gazing echo chambers involve some -
not a lot, but some - rough and tumble with people able to air their differing views; not quite like a pub, but nor the tightly controlled formal environment that some might prefer.

To benefit from this I think forum posters should leave their egos by the door (investors should most certainly do this too), not wish to overly control things and embrace a little chaos. Occasional nuggets of valuable stuff periodically emerge from that chaos, and closing yourself off to it can be to your detriment.

If instead posters wish to tightly control the environment in which they write, then my advice would be to become a publisher: that is, write a blog where (a) you fully control the published content and (b) you decide whether comments can be posted at all and/or where you can personally filter those comments that do get shown.

Fighting talk!

[Wizard]

Discussing three HYP shares, where else would it go?

To use the "Share Ideas" board, seems to restrict the discussion to that one stock only, without any broader comparisons.

Are you confusing Share ideas - Discuss Shares, buying selling, tips and deals with Company Share news (LSE Main Market) - Share latest information on individual companies and hot news discussions. LSE Main Market companies only.

The former regularly has composite post about numerous companies in MrC's Smallcap Sweeps.

I think Share Ideas is probably the right board. Having re-read the opening post it was about three life insurers, there was no specific HYP practical aspect to it, rather it was highlighting that these three are potentially good companies to invest in. What then happens if somebody responds to the post with a detailed analysis and shows some weakness they think undermines one of the companies? What happens if they then say that for that reason they think the company should be shorted? They can't on HYP-P, but on Share Ideas I believe they could.

I am in no way having a go at Dod, he is actually one of the people who posts on HYP-P that adds some real value. But I think, returning to my post above the reason why the Life Insurers thread goes on HYP-P is to some extent habit and to some extent (maybe subconsciously) a view that if it goes on Share Ideas or other boards it may be less likely to get a response.

[tikunetih]

...furthermore, what this site seems to excel at is Meta-Discussions, that is discussing the discussion of investing, as opposed to merely discussing investing itself.

Why?

Probably the overly formalised bureaucratised forum structure that means much of the focus becomes about where something should be filed and policing what can be discussed where, diverting finite mental energy from the actual subject of making money, which appears to be a secondary consideration.

[Charlottesquare]

Those that post upon the “High Yield Portfolio (HYP) – Practical” board mostly fall into one of four groups

1) Prima Donnas

Prima Donnas do not actively reject the HYP Strategy, in fact they say little, if anything at all about it. They need an audience to listen to the buys and sales that they make for what is most likely a trading strategy. They never discuss the practicalities of running an HYP, how could they when they do not maintain an HYP. They crave the attention of people to see how clever they have been with their trading and of course for that reason want the “High Yield Portfolio – Practical” board to continue. Hence Prima Donnas

2) William Webbs

William Webbs do usually have some kind of income strategy and may even have an equity portfolio for the purpose of generating income. They do however reject the HYP Strategy in that they want to change the HYP strategy so that it matches the strategy that they do actually follow. Like William Webb they have happily joined a football club but, as soon as they are in, they bang on about changing the rules of the game. One would still be allowed to kick the ball but how about: adding 4 more players, allowing people to run with the ball in hand, changing the goal posts, changing the way points are scored? And of course, they want to change the name to Rugby Football, to be more inclusive you understand. They want to destroy HYP as a strategy, but they do want to keep the “High Yield Portfolio – Practical” board, but for their own strategy

3) Aryans

Aryans believe that HYP should be banned in favour of a proper strategy, one that measures success by Total Return, the correct way you understand! They of course routinely attack HYP as a strategy usually by attacking some aspect that they claim will inevitably lead to disaster. The fact that the “aspect” they attack is not part of the HYP Strategy is of no matter, not when they are engaged in what they see as the noble mission of freeing all investors from what they perceive to be an HYP scourge. They of course want the “High Yield Portfolio – Practical” board banned, or at least banished to an area where it should no longer infect other investors.

4) HYPers

HYPers, and I am of course one of this group, simply want to build and manage their income portfolios by using the HYP Strategy as laid out by its originator. They accept that HYP does not have rules but does come with strong recommendations. Further, they understand that the strategy requires each individual HYPer to put those recommendations into practice in his/her own way and make his/her own investment decisions. This in turn leads to an understanding that, although there will be overlap, each HYP will be unique, chosen by its owner and no-one else. They want the members of the other poster groups to be politely but firmly told to leave the HYP Strategy and HYPers alone. And of course, HYPers want the “High Yield Portfolio – Practical” board to be returned to its original purpose: the discussion of the practicalities of running an HYP.


Ian

You missed a category

Pragmatists

Follow no strict portfolio rules or approaches except have a leaning more towards shares that pay reasonable dividends irrespective of whether individual companies, ITs etc and merely pop into HYP practical every so often to see what those who that do more follow HYP are saying as sometimes it is interesting/helpful to their own investments and the odd idea re particular shares is picked up along the way. They are akin to agnostics who enjoying listening to "Carols from Kings" at Christmas and occasionally make comment/observations about why particular hymns got selected.I suspect I try to fall into this class.

[Alaric]

Having re-read the opening post it was about three life insurers, there was no specific HYP practical aspect to it, rather it was highlighting that these three are potentially good companies to invest in.

The "HYP Strategy" initial method of stock selection is a sort by dividend yield, therefore all three, L&G especially, would appear in such a list. Whilst growth HYP Investors can be sanguine about a (temporary) loss of dividends, income seeking investors needing cash to withdraw or living expenses, rather less so, especially in the absence of other sources.

L&G's market price would put the dividend yield at around 9% if the dividend was maintained, so something appears to have spooked the market. High yields mostly come with an overt or hidden risk. In L&Gs case it would appear to be the downgrading of their Bond asset portfolio and the knock on effects of that on their solvency in a worst case or only their dividend if the Directors or regulators got alarmed with no real cause for concern.

[richfool]

For example, - PHP (a property company) gets discussed under HYP Practical (!), but what about REIT's? They can't?

REITs are acceptable on High Yield Portfolios (HYP) - Practical per the combined Board Guidance viewtopic.php?f=31&t=8652.

Though (to add to the confusion) "REIT's & Property Coys", like IT's, also have their own separate board.

[IanTHughes]

Those that post upon the “High Yield Portfolio (HYP) – Practical” board mostly fall into one of four groups

viewtopic.php?p=310906#p310906

You missed a category

Pragmatists

Follow no strict portfolio rules or approaches except have a leaning more towards shares that pay reasonable dividends irrespective of whether individual companies, ITs etc and merely pop into HYP practical every so often to see what those who that do more follow HYP are saying as sometimes it is interesting/helpful to their own investments and the odd idea re particular shares is picked up along the way. They are akin to agnostics who enjoying listening to "Carols from Kings" at Christmas and occasionally make comment/observations about why particular hymns got selected.I suspect I try to fall into this class.

I am sure that you are right.

In my defence I would say that an HYPer like myself would have difficulty in identifying a Pragmatist. Unlike Prima Donnas, they are following an income strategy and, unlike William Webbs and Aryans, they are neither trying to change the strategy nor ban or banish it. They are simply adding ideas and no doubt sometimes picking up ideas for their own strategies, most welcome in fact.


Ian

[Arborbridge]

I can only answer for the moment this point about being "insincere", I'd ask you to judge me and tell me whether you think my case is one of the insincere ones, and why. ...
I note you think people are somehow frauds because they have other income than HYP. I can't see why you say that. It's true that there are probably only half a dozen of us whose main income is from invesments, but that is hardly a personal moral fault, rather just good fortune. People are allowed to have more than one way of earning a living and they could still sincerely believe in the advantages of running a HYP.

I don't say that, but I understand how it might be a natural reaction to what admittedly was quite a to-the-point post.

People are entitled to have whatever other income they want. It doesn't make them a fraud.

And I repeatedly say that it is only the guidelines (and to some extent perhaps the culture - fear of mentioning if you've got foreign ETFs, or investment trusts, or prefs, etc) of the HYP practical board - that the discussion has to be kept to the HYP - that collectively bring about, imho, the insincerity / deception / fraud / call it what you want.

It is that which collectively hides, or significantly downplays, the reality behind most people's HYPs - namely that most people aren't dependent upon their HYP to fund their retirement; most people have other significant sources of income - including substantial holdings of other non-HYP shares.

It's not a fault or attribute I ascribe to any individual poster. Certainly not.
In fact, quite the opposite, it comes from the posters respecting the rules and being good citizens of the board!

It's an inevitable outcome, emergent property if you like, of the guidelines / culture of the board... not the fault of the posters abiding by the rules.

When the regular discussion relates solely to HYP without consideration of what importance each HYP is to each individual, then there's nothing against which readers can judge people's confidence (or otherwise) in the approach.

There's nothing that really says to newcomers... whoa! yeh, hang on, sure these people are enthusiastic, and rigorous about their HYP investments... but whoah, they aren't depending on them for their retirements! They're more like a side hobby for interest.

Which to be honest, is quite the opposite impression compared to what I had from the TMF days. My hazy recollection was that an HYP as originally presented by PYAD was a supposed low maintenance, easy, self managed alternative to handing over your pension savings to a fund manager who'd charge ridiculous fees for doing something you could easily do yourself.

I admit, that perhaps some of my viewpoint stems from still thinking of the HYP in those terms - a continuation of the PYAD HYP - though I admit looking at the HYP practical guidelines today, there's no mention of an HYP being an annuity replacement, or even for generating an income of any sort in retirement, or anything like that.

In fact, there's no mention in the guideline at all that I can see of the purpose of an HYP - not even that the HYP should be primarily aimed at generating income rather than capital growth.

So on that basis, not sure how the discussions on safety margins came about a month or two back....

Hmmm, maybe I should have just kept lurking... now I've looked properly at the guidelines, I'm not actually sure at all what an HYP is supposed to be for in the context of the HYP practical board!

Well, I'm glad we cleared that up....as least, I think we did
But there doesn't seem that much in you post above which would really justify calling HYPers or the board itself "insincere", so to that extent, I'm relieved!

I wasn't aware that the board doesn't specify "what a HYP is for" . It's a shame there's no reference to the purpose of a HYP, which is quite specific and marks it out as rather difference from other investment types - nor to its background and evolution. Well, perhaps that was all considered too much or too difficult to put up. Maybe there is something and I've just missed it but when LMF started, the old cohort knew what a HYP was for, (high and increasing income with some chance of capital appreciation, would be my interpretation) so perhaps it didn't need mentioning?




Arb.

[Alaric]

Maybe there is something and I've just missed it but when LMF started, the old cohort knew what a HYP was for, (high and increasing income with some chance of capital appreciation, would be my interpretation) so perhaps it didn't need mentioning?

But is it to increase wealth or to supply cash as an income? If it's the former it's just a specialist growth strategy.

[Arborbridge]

As a postscript to my above post, I was too late to edit it.

For someone who wants to discuss IT's, Investment Coys, Property Coys, REIT's be they high yielding, or low yielding, or growth focussed, it becomes a confusing nightmare.

For example, - PHP (a property company) gets discussed under HYP Practical (!), but what about REIT's? They can't? If REIT's can be discussed, then what about IT's. Note that some IT's are not actually IT's but Investment companies. What about IT's investing in renewables?

Then some post about higher income IT's on the High Yielding Shares & Strategies board, but lower yielding IT's not allowed. Logic to me says IT's (regardless of yield) should be on the IT board. Or is that too simple and too logical!

It always puzzled me, on the old Motley Fool boards, that L'Universal would post annual reports of particular income focussed Investment Trusts on the board about "Income shares", rather than the board specifically set up for Investment Trusts. Is there something taboo about Investment Trusts, or are they considered to be low class by HYP'ers?

Yours frustrated.

Well, yes, I can see some of the problems. Luckily, I seem mostly to avoid such dilemmas, so perhaps I am blind to them. Where there's been a bordeline case, PHP was one recently, I just ask for advice and react accordingly. My instinct, as I've often written, is to keep my HYP as clean as possible - keep away from anything borderline: why put them in a HYP anyway? Many people have shares which are external to what they call their HYP, so I do not find it a problem. I haven't come across a problem with REITS since mine were conversions of normal trading companies, and they certainly aren't ITs as I understand them. The name was born to confuse!

I wonder if you might be making life complicated by overthinking it?

Arb.