Boards are roughly right, labels misleading?

[TUK020]

After reading Gengulphus' eloquent (as always) explanation for his absence, and the soul searching that it triggered, and the subsequent arguments for a Total Return board, I tried to refrain from contributing for a while, and spend some time thinking about what boards I post on, read and what I find them useful for.

Strategies vs Practical
By the inherent nature of the subject, strategy topics tend to be infrequent and more abstract.
Recent posts on the "Investment Strategies" board cover topics such as Asset Allocation, Comparing high yield vs growth, The next decade, Is value investing dead?
Does what it says on the tin, adequately covers strategy discussions about Total Return vs Income.

HYP - Practical
This does tend to generate the highest volume of posts and new topics.
However, the desire to turn this into a safe space for adherents of Bland Annuity Replacement strategy is driving down the interest and insight available here.
A lot of the posts are results/dividend statements of high yield companies that are in most people's portfolios. Helpful thread about who has cut/rebased etc. Useful information but not necessarily providing any insight.
Some of the posts seem to be cross posted news items of company announcements (BigOil Ltd closes its last well in Bisonsarse, Montana; MegaPharma failed Stage 3 trials on Bolloximab for ingrowing toenails) that are of little practical relevance to a retail investor.
Reporting of top up decisions that are strictly following Bland/PYAD rules are essentially driven by market data and the poster's portfolio composition - mechanical in nature, and do not really provide any insight.

"Non Bland/PYAD practical"
Where someone is selling/topslicing, or ruling out a share for top up as a result of having a market/economic viewpoint offends against the Bland PYAD Annuity Replacement rules. Ditto a decision to shift balance to Investment Trusts to get greater overseas exposure, accept a lower yield for greater perceived predictability of dividend growth etc. etc.
These are a result of peoples' decisions not to buy and hold forever, pick highest yield mechanically, forego any strategic view, where they have decided to 'stray from the path'.
This is actually the interesting stuff worth reading to pick up the knowledge, understanding and insights of this community.
Trouble is, where this gets posted on the "Practical" board it tends to degenerate into "Is/Isn't PYADic" type arguments.
More and more, this sort of material is migrating to "High Yield Shares and Strategies -General". The strategy word is a bit misleading, as this stuff is essentially practical in nature.

Overall
There is still a lot of useful stuff here. Trouble is that it is getting buried in noise, and requires more work to sift out.
An example: Midsmartin posted on Global/Macro on 5th Feb - "Investment impact of Coronavirus, is anyone was selling off?"
5th Feb. Did anyone see it? Did it get considered response?
Board structure + labels + moderating should result in boards that are easier to navigate and help pick out stuff that you think relevant and important.
Board Structure I think is OK.
Moderators I don't always agree with, but I am really grateful for the volunteer job they do.
I keep coming back to the fact that I think the labels are what cause the problem.

If you have read this far, thank you, and I hope I haven't added to the 'noise'.

[Gengulphus]

For the record:

* I believe that "Bland Annuity Replacement strategy" is a thoroughly misleading name, as how pyad's original HYP strategy behaves is too different from how an annuity behaves to function sensibly as a replacement for one, and his original article about it indicates that "Bland Guaranteed Income Bond Replacement strategy" would be much closer to its intention. "HYP" is not a good name, I know, but it's about 19 years too late to change it for a better one, let alone one as poor as this one.

* I have no desire to turn HYP Practical into a safe space for strict adherents of pyad's original HYP strategy only. A few of the board's users do give me the impression that that's their desire, but I'm not among them, and neither are quite a lot of the board's other users judging by how they report running their HYPs.

* I do have a desire to turn HYP Practical into what it was originally supposed to be: a safe space for discussing the practicalities of running HYP strategies. That's plural strategies, including ones that deliberately 'stray from the path' (as you put it) of pyad's original HYP strategy. For example, TJH's HYP strategy demonstrably isn't one that buys and holds forever, and the way he runs it is thoroughly on-topic on HYP Practical as far as I am concerned.

By the way, this post is only meant as a statement of my position, to counter any impression that the OP might give people that I "desire to turn this [HYP Practical] into a safe space for adherents of Bland Annuity Replacement strategy". And I'm not implying that any such impression is deliberate - just that the OP could inadvertently give such an impression by describing thoughts prompted by my "My absence" thread.

Gengulphus

[PinkDalek]

I'm only replying to this part:

An example: Midsmartin posted on Global/Macro on 5th Feb - "Investment impact of Coronavirus, is anyone was selling off?"5th Feb. Did anyone see it? Did it get considered response?

The only post I can find from Midsmartin dated 5 February 2020 is linked below. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your point on that example but the thread is presently 36 pages long and, clearly a fair number saw it. I can't answer if the responses were considered or not but I do note the first page appears mainly to be talking about the pandemic itself.

viewtopic.php?p=282589#p282589

Perhaps no-one managed to spot the original question, which, given the topic header, is perhaps not surprising once they got to page 2 and onwards.

My guess is Coronavirus - (macro investment aspects only please) wasn't the original title. It may have only been Coronavirus. If I'm correct, that is one of the issues I have generally. For people to stay on the subject, it would be helpful if some thought were given to topic titles by the OPs.

Not that I've done as I suggested but I don't wish to comment on the rest of your post, as one or two of the phrases you start with Capital letters can only lead to the normal type of discussion we see all too often and aren't what we see in the BOARD GUIDANCE - Which High Yield Board?.

Further I see G has now replied since I started, so I'll leave it there.

[Clariman]

I will read and follow this discussion. The mods have had some discussions on this but not reached any conclusions.

[TUK020]

By the way, this post is only meant as a statement of my position, to counter any impression that the OP might give people that I "desire to turn this [HYP Practical] into a safe space for adherents of Bland Annuity Replacement strategy". And I'm not implying that any such impression is deliberate - just that the OP could inadvertently give such an impression by describing thoughts prompted by my "My absence" thread.

Gengulphus

Not my intention, apologies if my clumsy wording could be interpreted that way

[Gengulphus]

By the way, this post is only meant as a statement of my position, to counter any impression that the OP might give people that I "desire to turn this [HYP Practical] into a safe space for adherents of Bland Annuity Replacement strategy". And I'm not implying that any such impression is deliberate - just that the OP could inadvertently give such an impression by describing thoughts prompted by my "My absence" thread.

Not my intention, apologies if my clumsy wording could be interpreted that way

Thanks, but no need to apologise - any such reading would be due to readers managing to read more than what you'd said into your post!

Gengulphus

[valueinvestor123]

Nice to see the same arguments/conversations still going on as on TMF almost 20 years ago
This makes me nostalgic!

[Alaric]

Nice to see the same arguments/conversations still going on as on TMF almost 20 years ago

Investing in higher yielding instruments could be a sensible strategy both for retirement income and building wealth. Surrounding it with ideological baggage isn't. A discussion board about higher yielding instruments would be uncontroversial without the baggage. The term "higher yielding" should also include instruments with a lower initial yield but expected rapid income growth.

[CryptoPlankton]

Nice to see the same arguments/conversations still going on as on TMF almost 20 years ago

Investing in higher yielding instruments could be a sensible strategy both for retirement income and building wealth. Surrounding it with ideological baggage isn't. A discussion board about higher yielding instruments would be uncontroversial without the baggage.

Perhaps a board called "High Yield Shares and Strategies - general" would fit the bill?

[Alaric]

Perhaps a board called "High Yield Shares and Strategies - general" would fit the bill?

That's how it's used in practice, for fear of offending the dedicated HYPers.

But take the Whitbread rights issue. That's a single share practical issue.

[csearle]

Perhaps a board called "High Yield Shares and Strategies - general" would fit the bill?

That's how it's used in practice, for fear of offending the dedicated HYPers.

Hardly. It is used like that in practice because that is the place for such discussions rather than the other board, which is not.

We see from your profile that your most active forum is High Yield Portfolios (HYP) - Practical with 427 posts. This is remarkable considering that you clearly do not agree with the tenets of that approach and yet, as has been pointed out to you and others ad nauseum, neither is it the place we want discussion of the approach to take place.

So surprise us all by posting on the correct board. Save us a lot of work!

Chris

[Alaric]

neither is it the place we want discussion of the approach to take place.

Which is the point really. Why does what would be generally regarded as an off the wall clique approach to investment complete with its own dogma desire its own specialist board?

As it happens I don't have any problem with the general concept of using higher yielding investments either for retirement income or for building of wealth by reinvestment. It's elevating it to an ideology that's objectionable.

[csearle]

Why does what would be generally regarded as an off the wall clique approach to investment complete with its own dogma desire its own specialist board?

It doesn't. It already has one.

As it happens I don't have any problem with the general concept of using higher yielding investments either for retirement income or for building of wealth by reinvestment. It's elevating it to an ideology that's objectionable.

I honestly believe you find it objectionable. Just ignore it then. Surely you don't need to read it if you don't agree with it? Come up with an approach that you sincerely believe in and discuss it at length somewhere else. Link to it from HYP-P if you think the readership there would be interested. If it turns out that it has merit maybe one day there might be good cause to create a board dedicated to that too.

Chris

[csearle]

If it turns out that it has merit maybe one day there might be good cause to create a board dedicated to that too.

In fact that could be fun. We create a section (like Managing Your Finances) called, say, Personal Investment Strategy Competition. In it brave individuals enjoy a board each to create, develop, and hone their individual wealth/income strategies. Every year each competitor starts a new portfolio with a notional £100000 to invest in any way that they feel matches their strategy. They publish all notional transactions and all the work involved with maintaining a reasonable valuation following corporate actions. Each year the salient data are published, preferably in a tabular form by a keen adjudicator.

As an incentive each winner can claim a free beer off me at the TLF London social (as long as I am alive and am still going there).

Chris

[IanTHughes]

If it turns out that it has merit maybe one day there might be good cause to create a board dedicated to that too.

In fact that could be fun. We create a section (like Managing Your Finances) called, say, Personal Investment Strategy Competition. In it brave individuals enjoy a board each to create, develop, and hone their individual wealth/income strategies. Every year each competitor starts a new portfolio with a notional £100000 to invest in any way that they feel matches their strategy. They publish all notional transactions and all the work involved with maintaining a reasonable valuation following corporate actions. Each year the salient data are published, preferably in a tabular form by a keen adjudicator.

As an incentive each winner can claim a free beer off me at the TLF London social (as long as I am alive and am still going there).

HYP is already up and running:

Income Drawdown: viewtopic.php?p=297566#p297566

Income ReInvest: viewtopic.php?p=300707#p300707

The only ones I have seen so far, so I guess you owe someone a beer

You are still alive?


Ian

[Alaric]

HYP is already up and running:

Are you going to publish a forecast or projection of income for 2020-21? As far as I recall there was a forecast or projection of year 1 income. How about year 2?

[Stonge]

Oh God not another of these threads.

[Gengulphus]

If it turns out that it has merit maybe one day there might be good cause to create a board dedicated to that too.

In fact that could be fun. We create a section (like Managing Your Finances) called, say, Personal Investment Strategy Competition. In it brave individuals enjoy a board each to create, develop, and hone their individual wealth/income strategies. Every year each competitor starts a new portfolio with a notional £100000 to invest in any way that they feel matches their strategy. They publish all notional transactions and all the work involved with maintaining a reasonable valuation following corporate actions. Each year the salient data are published, preferably in a tabular form by a keen adjudicator.

As an incentive each winner can claim a free beer off me at the TLF London social (as long as I am alive and am still going there).

HYP is already up and running:

Income Drawdown: viewtopic.php?p=297566#p297566

Income ReInvest: viewtopic.php?p=300707#p300707

The only ones I have seen so far, so I guess you owe someone a beer

You are still alive?

I'm afraid your entries are disqualified, as they've failed to comply with the "We create a section (like Managing Your Finances) called, say, Personal Investment Strategy Competition. In it brave individuals enjoy a board each ..." part of the proposed rules. I.e. you've posted them on the wrong board! :-P

A more serious (but only slightly more serious!) comment is that the "Every year each competitor starts a new portfolio ..." part of the proposed rules is unfairly biased against long-term strategies. I therefore propose that "Every year ..." should be amended to "Every 25 years ...". Note that those who prefer short-term strategies would be entirely free to run one for a year (or whatever other short term they favour), then sell up and use the proceeds to run a short-term strategy (either the same or a different one) for another year, and repeat - provided of course that they account properly for the trading costs involved. If their short-term strategy really is superior, its superior returns should compound up very nicely over 25 years - and if it isn't, well, they wouldn't want to win by the pure luck of just happening to hit the perfect market conditions for an inferior strategy, would they?

I regard this as a very modest proposal, achieving a big reduction in bias between strategies with different terms with a very small and simple change to the rules of the competition.

Gengulphus

[csearle]

A more serious (but only slightly more serious!) comment is that the "Every year each competitor starts a new portfolio ..." part of the proposed rules is unfairly biased against long-term strategies.

That's only because I didn't express it well enough. I meant that a new one would be started every year to run concurrently with all the previous ones.

(I think it's a scathingly brilliant idea as people will be so busy with the admin of this they will have less time for vexatious posts. )

Chris

[IanTHughes]

HYP is already up and running:

Are you going to publish a forecast or projection of income for 2020-21? As far as I recall there was a forecast or projection of year 1 income. How about year 2?

No, I do not do forecasts. If you want to "see" into the future, you should ask a fortune teller.


Ian