Quality HYP

[CryptoPlankton]

The general problem is that anything critical or sceptical of "the HYP Strategy" is treated as off topic for that board, so therefore has to come to this one, or elsewhere on TLF.

Where's the problem? If you want to criticise the HYP strategy then you start a thread here (as I said where you have quoted me!). There's no need for that "scepticism" to leak into other high yield strategy threads though - the world doesn't revolve around HYP and not even the HYP "purists" suggest it does. But I see no reason why they can't just get on with it in peace on HYP -P.

I think what baffles a lot of people is why only HYP has a special "safe space" status and no other investment topic.

You can go to the Funds forum, for instance, and criticise funds in general or any particular fund. Same with all the other investment boards. But not HYP. Why the need for special protection? Why the need for immunity from criticism?

But why not? It is quite possible to discuss/criticise it elsewhere without interrupting its intended function. If the Technical Analysis board was busier and "invaded" by interlopers shouting it's all bunkum then, quite rightly IMHO, they would be told to go away. If they wanted to poo poo TA then they could always do so somewhere like Investment Strategies where chartists could argue their case if they so wished, but shouldn't they be able to discuss their double bottoms in peace in the place dedicated to it? In general, why shouldn't people with a shared interest not be allowed to pursue it without interference?

Clearly, other people feel differently so no point in me saying any more - just a shame that it seems to take up so much pointless time and energy from people who generally have more interesting stuff to say...

[Itsallaguess]

There's simply a site-rule that says that any such criticism shouldn't take place on HYP Practical..

That however is the point about that Board having a special protected status. A share is suggested for purchase. If you believe it to be a dog or a stinker where can these views be expressed? That's particularly if the reason it's high yield is because the share price has halved or more over the previous year or so.

I'm sorry Alaric, but this isn't a subject that I want to engage with you on any further.

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

[Lootman]

If the Technical Analysis board was busier and "invaded" by interlopers shouting it's all bunkum then, quite rightly IMHO, they would be told to go away. If they wanted to poo poo TA then they could always do so somewhere like Investment Strategies where chartists could argue their case if they so wished, but shouldn't they be able to discuss their double bottoms in peace in the place dedicated to it? In general, why shouldn't people with a shared interest not be allowed to pursue it without interference?

I have seen people criticise TA on the TA board. Usually the proponents of TA either engage the debate or ignore it.

Same with every other board where criticism is allowed.

I think with HYP the reason may be historical i.e. two boards were carved out of one on TMF because, at that time, there was a significant following for the method. Between the move from there to TLF and the disappointing performance of many HYPs, it seems that the following has dwindled. And that raises the question of whether the notion of having two boards just for one topic is still relevant.

As an example, three of the most prolific HY posters over on TMF were Luniveral, Gengulphus and of course Pyad. Those three now either never post here or rarely do. In fact I think it was Gengulphus who was the cheerleader and architect of the separate boards idea.

There were various other topics on TMF that had a general and a practical split. But those were all merged into one with the move to TLF, except for HYP.

[CryptoPlankton]

If the Technical Analysis board was busier and "invaded" by interlopers shouting it's all bunkum then, quite rightly IMHO, they would be told to go away. If they wanted to poo poo TA then they could always do so somewhere like Investment Strategies where chartists could argue their case if they so wished, but shouldn't they be able to discuss their double bottoms in peace in the place dedicated to it? In general, why shouldn't people with a shared interest not be allowed to pursue it without interference?

I have seen people criticise TA on the TA board. Usually the proponents of TA either engage the debate or ignore it.

Same with every other board where criticism is allowed.

I think with HYP the reason may be historical i.e. two boards were carved out of one on TMF because, at that time, there was a significant following for the method. Between the move from there to TLF and the disappointing performance of many HYPs, it seems that the following has dwindled. And that raises the question of whether the notion of having two boards just for one topic is still relevant.

As an example, three of the most prolific HY posters over on TMF were Luniveral, Gengulphus and of course Pyad. Those three now either never post here or rarely do. In fact I think it was Gengulphus who was the cheerleader and architect of the separate boards idea.

There were various other topics on TMF that had a general and a practical split. But those were all merged into one with the move to TLF, except for HYP.

What really baffles me is why on earth you care enough to bang on like this about it so much? It is just one discussion board. The only reasons I can think of are a lingering resentment of Stephen Bland's financial exploitation of a very basic idea and a desire to discredit him and expunge any vestige of his HYP concept from this site. Close? Anyway, I have said all I wanted to say and, since I have no skin in this pointless game, I shall endeavour to simply ignore such "discussions" in future - annoyingly prolific as they are.

[Wizard]

Just leave the HYP-P board to do its thing. I must admit I was also thinking how few people actually post anything of real substance on there these days, my guess is no more than four or five. If anyone has any issue with type 1. or type 2. HYP as an approach or wants to discuss things off topic for that board, such as the topic of this thread (which seems to fit into type 3. HYP) then just post it here, as the OP very sensibly did.

[Alaric]

as the OP very sensibly did.

I rather think it was moved, lest the description of some HYP selections as "stinkers" be found offensive.

[Wizard]

One thing that has always bugged me about HYP was needing to include into my portfolio shares that I didn't particularly like, in the name of strategic ignorance, sector diversity and wanting at least 25 shares in it. I'd always thought that selecting well-managed companies with growing and supported dividends was the heart of a successful HYP, but the standard HYP selection process always seemed to recommend quite a few stinkers for my portfolio, and more often than I'd like I'd have to hold my nose with one hand while I pressed the Buy button with the other.

Instead of just complaining, I had a think about an alternative and what I came up with was a hybrid "Quality HYP" which partners individual shares with Investment Trusts. Broadly speaking I was thinking of splitting investments into 3 categories:
1) 30% UK shares - around 10 to 15 'quality' HYP shares, including some 'steady eddies'
2) 30% UK Income ITs
3) 40% International Income ITs

I think that the ITs would provide me with a broad baseline yield, and I could still invest in individual, quality HYP shares for a long-term boost in income units.

I'd be grateful for your thoughts!

(P.S. I've thought of another name for the HYP principle of building a diverse portfolio of shares .... herd immunity!)

To try and bring things back to the topic at hand. I think the post makes a great deal of sense, another way of thinking about your 'stinkers' is the term sometimes used 'diworsification'. The initial suggestion of 15 plus shares was for the disinterested "granny in Hove" who would not have been abole to tell a good share from a bad one. For anyone who believes they can spot the 'stinkers' if that means having fewer shares so be it. If that means a lack of sector diversification why worry? As I mentioned way up this thread I would not exclude non-UK shares, but that is personal choice.

[Wizard]

as the OP very sensibly did.

I rather think it was moved, lest the description of some HYP selections as "stinkers" be found offensive.

Not debating it, whatever.

[Arborbridge]

I, for one, would prefer that "HYP" is left on "HYP-P" (except maybe when someone wants to start a thread specifically about it that would be off-topic for that board) and this board just does what it says on the tin - get on with talking about high yield strategies with no restrictions...

The general problem is that anything critical or sceptical of "the HYP Strategy" is treated as off topic for that board, so therefore has to come to this one, or elsewhere on TLF.

I principle, it shouldn't be a problem: it has always be true that one should not discuss "whether or not HYP is a good idea" on HYP-P, and that always seemed to work quite well. There was always some diffixulty at the "interface" and I've had to be careful expressing some thoughts where I might be pointing out, for example, that I am investing more in ITs because my HYP management is as good as it could be.

However, I acknowledge that the atmosphere has become worse in the past year, bit I'm also undecided why this should be. The guidelines haven't changed, so either the pure HYP people set off alerts more readily, or the TR enthusiasts and HYP critics are more vociferous, or the mods are more intrusive - or a combination of those things.
I've read comments that the mods are more tolerant, which could be true. On the other hand, I've had comments that "alerts are going off all over the place" which suggests that posters are engaging in some sort of polarisation - themselves becoming less tolerant. This in itself could be a response from classic HYPers to those who regularly post comments of the "is HYP any good?" or "all you need is TR" sort. Who knows, but it's clear that there is some increased tension between the two camps which is tending to undermine the board. I've been around for well over ten years, and this has never happened before to any serious extent, so I've no idea why it should be a major problem now when it wasn't previously.

It is also true that there is less technical discussion of HYP on the board, but I'm surprised this didn't happen years ago. After all, once we've thrashed out the basics, what then? All there is to do is to post reports on activity and discuss the robustness of different shares.

That the last post on HYP-P was three days ago (last time I looked, anyway) speaks volumes.

Arb.

[Alaric]

That the last post on HYP-P was three days ago (last time I looked, anyway) speaks volumes.

That might be because posts are being deleted or transferred to other boards.

[Arborbridge]

That the last post on HYP-P was three days ago (last time I looked, anyway) speaks volumes.

That might be because posts are being deleted or transferred to other boards.

Which just points up the malaise. For whatever reason, deletable or OT posts are being written, rather than appropriate ones. What was by far the most popular board in terms of number of contributions, is in danger of being a skeleton of its former self - and this has happened in months rather than years.
I don't think it has been helped by investors feel hopeless about the present state of dividend cancellations (but haven't we been expecting a downturn for years, and didn't we have the example of what happened last time?!) and this has also given an opportunity for those not agreeing with the HYP idea to exploit the disatisfaction by raising questions. Maybe that's all it is, but the general needling and guerilla warfare has been going on for longer than that.

We all have different ways of investing, and these change with time and need. Personally, I am very much a live and let live person, but when it comes to the HYP-P board, it is very much a niche area, and I am happy that the rules should be adhered to - even though I find myself deleted for not following them on occasions. Even if I were totally besotted with TR or momentum investing, I wouldn't see the point of trying to bang that drum on HYP-P, or needling those people who think differently, and that's what some people seem to be trying to do. As I say: live and let live - each to his own.

Arb.


Arb

[Padders72]

Which is ironic really since now (well mid March) may well be the best time In the past 10 years to have gone all in on an Ultra orthodox pyadian HYP. As long as you don’t need the dividend for a couple of years, and they do in fact come back at some point, everything was available for a song. You may get a nice capital uplift too but of course wouldn’t care about that. Strategic ignorance being the watchword.

I doubt any new money would be brave enough to go down that road any time soon though.

[Alaric]

Which is ironic really since now (well mid March) may well be the best time In the past 10 years to have gone all in on an Ultra orthodox pyadian HYP. As long as you don’t need the dividend for a couple of years, and they do in fact come back at some point, everything was available for a song.

The original concept was that it would be an annuity replacement. Thus the ideas of ignoring market value fluctuations and never selling. Without the numerous modifications made to the original concept those who rely on investments for income have made in practice, it's not looking a terribly clever idea for anyone reliant on it for income.

[Alaric]

There doesn't seem to be much in the way of new blood buying into the strategy as previous stalwarts leave/lose interest/give up/whatever.

Perhaps as a board HYP - Practical should be given the same status as "Polite Discussions", that it only becomes visible in searches for new posts etc. when subscribed to explicitly. For more general use, replace it by a board parallel to this one, namely "High Yield Shares & Strategies - practical" where discussions of individual Bonds, Preference Shares, Overseas Shares etc were encouraged and the definition of "High" was that the dividend or income return would exceed deposits and perhaps Gilts.

[Arborbridge]

Forgive me for pointing out a couple of obvious things here (obvious to me, anyway). There doesn't seem to be much in the way of new blood buying into the strategy as previous stalwarts leave/lose interest/give up/whatever. When the answer to "what do we do now?" seems mainly to be "spend less", then that's not a surprise. Is it? Perhaps add to that cocktail a bit of cabin fever and the number detractors now perhaps outweigh the proponents, result could be what you see now?

RVF

Yes, it's all true. I expect the pendulum will swing back eventually. I can remember HY wasn't flavour of the month at some point years ago, then it was all over the magazines and people were looking for income. My little "niche" had been raided and yields which had been the best for years were heading downwards.

Just now, you couldn't ask for a better time for HY investment - especially as it seems we will have years more of low - or even negative - interest rates. As Padders72 said. this would appear an excellent time.

At present, we have a particular trouble with HY direct share investment. Clearly, no one can tell which cimpany will cancel next, and this will put the mockers on things for a good while. The result could be that more money is diverting to ITs where people will exploit their reserve function to give at least some temporary assurance of payouts. I've been doing this more than investing in my HYP just lately, so presumably others are too.

It may be that some of us will prefer to let Managers judge which companies are worth backing, especially those who feel they have been "caught" by cancellations and had their confidence tested.
I note that I topped up the HYP both in April and May in addition to ITs, so my activity rolls on more or less as it has for a decade with just slightly more emphasis on ITs.

Arb.

[Arborbridge]

There doesn't seem to be much in the way of new blood buying into the strategy as previous stalwarts leave/lose interest/give up/whatever.

Perhaps as a board HYP - Practical should be given the same status as "Polite Discussions", that it only becomes visible in searches for new posts etc. when subscribed to explicitly. For more general use, replace it by a board parallel to this one, namely "High Yield Shares & Strategies - practical" where discussions of individual Bonds, Preference Shares, Overseas Shares etc were encouraged and the definition of "High" was that the dividend or income return would exceed deposits and perhaps Gilts.

Is that a serious suggestion? So, has this been your agenda all along with your TR interventions and needling?: let's destroy the HYP community altogether. The ultimate Triumph of the TR brigade.

Not on your nelly, mate.

Here's me affirming a live and let live approach, and you go for the juggular.

[jackdaww]

There doesn't seem to be much in the way of new blood buying into the strategy as previous stalwarts leave/lose interest/give up/whatever.

Perhaps as a board HYP - Practical should be given the same status as "Polite Discussions", that it only becomes visible in searches for new posts etc. when subscribed to explicitly. For more general use, replace it by a board parallel to this one, namely "High Yield Shares & Strategies - practical" where discussions of individual Bonds, Preference Shares, Overseas Shares etc were encouraged and the definition of "High" was that the dividend or income return would exceed deposits and perhaps Gilts.

Is that a serious suggestion? So, has this been your agenda all along with your TR interventions and needling?: let's destroy the HYP community altogether. The ultimate Triumph of the TR brigade.

Not on your nelly, mate.

Here's me affirming a live and let live approach, and you go for the juggular.

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

i have proposed a new TR board elsewhere in a biscuit bar thread .

but not in any way in competition with other boards .

certainly not the HYP-P board , which must , and certainly will continue with a big following .

[Alaric]

Is that a serious suggestion?

I don't see why not. It would prevent newcomers to the TLF site stumbling into a minefield and give the protection demanded for the special views considered orthodox in that board.

[jackdaww]

Is that a serious suggestion?

I don't see why not. It would prevent newcomers to the TLF site stumbling into a minefield and give the protection demanded for the special views considered orthodox in that board.

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

that has always been my concern , newcomers being seduced with all the cosy consensus .

but you suggestion is a bit over the top.

[Arborbridge]

Perhaps as a board HYP - Practical should be given the same status as "Polite Discussions", that it only becomes visible in searches for new posts etc. when subscribed to explicitly. For more general use, replace it by a board parallel to this one, namely "High Yield Shares & Strategies - practical" where discussions of individual Bonds, Preference Shares, Overseas Shares etc were encouraged and the definition of "High" was that the dividend or income return would exceed deposits and perhaps Gilts.

Is that a serious suggestion? So, has this been your agenda all along with your TR interventions and needling?: let's destroy the HYP community altogether. The ultimate Triumph of the TR brigade.

Not on your nelly, mate.

Here's me affirming a live and let live approach, and you go for the juggular.

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

i have proposed a new TR board elsewhere in a biscuit bar thread .

but not in any way in competition with other boards .

certainly not the HYP-P board , which must , and certainly will continue with a big following .

That seems a good suggestion.