CryptoPlankton wrote:I can't quite understand why the people who want to discuss "HYP" (as in the specific method stemming from PYAD's initial articles, and what HYP Practical was set up for) aren't just allowed to get on with it.
If we are allowed such meta-discussion here then I'd define the issue this way. Once upon a time Pyad (or Bland, to use his real name) had a certain following and credibility on TMF, based on the fact that he used to be one of their paid freelance writers, and because TMF-UK has always emphasised dividends (in a way that the parent TMF-US never did).
So for a while he had some kind of de facto guru status, and the fact that I always thought the Emporer has no clothes on did not detract from that.
But then a few things happened. First 2007-2009, that collapsed the sacrosanct pillar of HYP - that dividends are stable, increasing and reliable. At some point Bland got fired from TMF or quit. And finally a newer crew of correspondents showed up who had better ideas, deeper ideas and a more demonstrable and verifiable pedigree and heritage, like TJH and Luniversal.
At which point Bland's star declined, further accelerated by the move to TLF where he has only sparsely contributed, and often gets lambasted.
So the real question is what to do now, as his legacy is deemed less relevant? The real need here to be addressed is investing for a sustainable and growing retirement income, and not speculating on and over-weighting a couple of historic winners. And in that context I am not sure that a busted flush from 17 years ago is what a critical mass here either want or need. That in turn informs the definitions of these two boards, which you appear to agree are sub-optimal. And, for that matter, whether we still need two - something I was never convinced about except for those who love extra complexity.
Moderator Message:
We are close to crossing the threshold. Attacking PYADs strategy is fair play but refrain from attacking the person. Raptor.