Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site

Boards are roughly right, labels misleading?

Formerly "Lemon Fool - Improve the Recipe" repurposed as Room 102 (see above).
Alaric
Lemon Half
Posts: 6032
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 9:05 am
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 1398 times

Re: Boards are roughly right, labels misleading?

#313571

Postby Alaric » May 30th, 2020, 9:23 am

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


Does it need a fortune teller to observe that if a Company cancels or suspends its dividend, then the dividend is £ nil until it changes its mind?

All the presentations of "new" HYP portfolios have made a projection or forecast of the year one dividend. If they didn't there wouldn't be anything to boost about.

Gengulphus
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4255
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:17 am
Been thanked: 2628 times

Re: Boards are roughly right, labels misleading?

#313630

Postby Gengulphus » May 30th, 2020, 11:23 am

csearle wrote:
Gengulphus wrote: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. :D )

Ah, I see! Very clever idea, because it's not just quite a bit of admin: it's a steadily-increasing amount of admin over the years as the number of portfolios the rules require competitors to run builds up (after all, the rule does say "Every year each competitor starts a new portfolio ..." rather than "Every year each competitor can choose to start a new portfolio ..."). So eventually they have no time left for vexatious posts! ;-)

Gengulphus

tjh290633
Lemon Half
Posts: 8208
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:20 am
Has thanked: 913 times
Been thanked: 4096 times

Re: Boards are roughly right, labels misleading?

#313632

Postby tjh290633 » May 30th, 2020, 11:26 am

Gengulphus wrote: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

If only I had 25 years to come. That would make me 112, which is a tad optimistic.

TJH

csearle
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4763
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 2:24 pm
Has thanked: 4810 times
Been thanked: 2083 times

Re: Boards are roughly right, labels misleading?

#313643

Postby csearle » May 30th, 2020, 11:56 am

tjh290633 wrote:If only I had 25 years to come. That would make me 112, which is a tad optimistic.
Hope you are training her up on where to find the "buy" button every 17 days Terry.

tjh290633
Lemon Half
Posts: 8208
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:20 am
Has thanked: 913 times
Been thanked: 4096 times

Re: Boards are roughly right, labels misleading?

#313654

Postby tjh290633 » May 30th, 2020, 12:30 pm

csearle wrote:
tjh290633 wrote:If only I had 25 years to come. That would make me 112, which is a tad optimistic.
Hope you are training her up on where to find the "buy" button every 17 days Terry.

I have to find her new library books on her tablet, which I would have thought would be an easy task to master.

I suspect grandchildren will be needed if the worst happens.

TJH

1nvest
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4323
Joined: May 31st, 2019, 7:55 pm
Has thanked: 680 times
Been thanked: 1316 times

Re: Boards are roughly right, labels misleading?

#313667

Postby 1nvest » May 30th, 2020, 1:34 pm

tjh290633 wrote:If only I had 25 years to come. That would make me 112, which is a tad optimistic.

When I was 30 I had anticipated age 70 life expectancy would see biotech advances improve that by 5 years every decade ... such that life expectancy might be 135, and that by then advances in bio-robotics might see life capacity extended out to indefinite. Visions of being able to upload ones mind and download it into a body of ones own choosing (swim with the dolphins etc.). Body destroyed - no problem, re-download into a new body that night and just have lost a day of memories. Fat chance now at the age of nearly 60 that I might even get to 70.

Clariman
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3268
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:17 am
Has thanked: 3077 times
Been thanked: 1557 times

Re: Boards are roughly right, labels misleading?

#313723

Postby Clariman » May 30th, 2020, 5:01 pm

Alaric wrote:
csearle wrote: 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.

Alaric,

If you object to the way that particular specialist board is run, then please post on other boards instead - and allow those who follow HYP Practical principles to get on with it. Many thanks.

Clariman


Return to “Room 102 - Site Issues, Complaints & General Chat”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests