The Lemon Fool

Hypster wrote:I’m sorry to see both John Hughman and Phil Oakley leave the IC. I think the magazine has greatly improved while John has been at the helm. I’ve learned so much from Phil Oakley and will miss his articles. I wonder if Algy Hall is in the running for editor or if Rosie Carr will be promoted to the top job? I see Algy won ‘journalist of the year’ at the CFA awards today…

When did they leave?
I did notice Rosie Carr writing the editorial piece for the last few weeks but didn't know they had moved on.

absolutezero wrote:

Hypster wrote:I’m sorry to see both John Hughman and Phil Oakley leave the IC. I think the magazine has greatly improved while John has been at the helm. I’ve learned so much from Phil Oakley and will miss his articles. I wonder if Algy Hall is in the running for editor or if Rosie Carr will be promoted to the top job? I see Algy won ‘journalist of the year’ at the CFA awards today…

When did they leave?
I did notice Rosie Carr writing the editorial piece for the last few weeks but didn't know they had moved on.

As of this week I think. Both have been listed in the credits page as recently as last Friday but both haven't contributed for a while. Phil confirmed yesterday that his break is permanent and he won't be coming back and John updated his Twitter bio to read "gainfully unemployed", having replaced his IC headshot with a selfie.

Hypster wrote:

absolutezero wrote:

Hypster wrote:I’m sorry to see both John Hughman and Phil Oakley leave the IC. I think the magazine has greatly improved while John has been at the helm. I’ve learned so much from Phil Oakley and will miss his articles. I wonder if Algy Hall is in the running for editor or if Rosie Carr will be promoted to the top job? I see Algy won ‘journalist of the year’ at the CFA awards today…

When did they leave?
I did notice Rosie Carr writing the editorial piece for the last few weeks but didn't know they had moved on.

As of this week I think. Both have been listed in the credits page as recently as last Friday but both haven't contributed for a while. Phil confirmed yesterday that his break is permanent and he won't be coming back and John updated his Twitter bio to read "gainfully unemployed", having replaced his IC headshot with a selfie.

Interesting.
I wonder if there is a story there or if it's just because they wanted a break.

I read the IC for Chris Dillow. Whilst I know what he'll say on many topics he still has a lot of interesting observations and I like his thinking. In fact although he seams more liberal than I am he has changed my views on things many times, but not always. I cannot get enough of his writing. I like rational data driven thinking and not rules of thumb and common practice.

AWOL wrote:I read the IC for Chris Dillow. Whilst I know what he'll say on many topics he still has a lot of interesting observations and I like his thinking. In fact although he seams more liberal than I am he has changed my views on things many times, but not always. I cannot get enough of his writing. I like rational data driven thinking and not rules of thumb and common practice.

He is interesting. For an (ex?) Marxist!!

His personal blog is of a similar style. It almost looks like stuff he wrote for the IC but decided not to use.
I suspect he's a prolific writer and someone else chooses what they include in the IC.
https://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com/

He's also good at replying to emails.

I too like Chris Dillow, though he often makes the same or very similar, comments each week on the portfolio review articles. They are eminently sensible and applicable, but nevertheless repetitive.

It must be very difficult to come out with fresh comments and observations on investment matters when you have to write every week. That may well be a factor in Hughman and Oakley deciding they've had enough.

absolutezero wrote:

AWOL wrote:He's also good at replying to emails.

The number of times that I have been tempted to write to him!

scrumpyjack wrote:I too like Chris Dillow, though he often makes the same or very similar, comments each week on the portfolio review articles. They are eminently sensible and applicable, but nevertheless repetitive.

I agree but I like his rational approach and that he counterbalances the "wealth advisors" and other young overpaid industry wonks who use evidence free rules of thumb and recommend high charging exotica funds, last year's winners, or suggest things like "30 funds is a minimum for building a diversified portfolio" as if less than 30 funds is the same as less than 30 stocks.

Is it just me or is he less enthusiastic about passive investing than he once was? I suspect the success of strategies like momentum has lead his to a broader view.

AWOL wrote:I agree but I like his rational approach and that he counterbalances the "wealth advisors" and other young overpaid industry wonks who use evidence free rules of thumb and recommend high charging exotica funds, last year's winners, or suggest things like "30 funds is a minimum for building a diversified portfolio" as if less than 30 funds is the same as less than 30 stocks.

Yes one of his frequent starting points is to keep any fees to a minimum, which is excellent and fundamental advice. Overwhelmingly the wealth advisors etc are focussed on maximising fees for themselves whilst smooth talking the clients into thinking that the fess are reasonable and that the advisers are 'adding value'. Firms like SJP seem to be mainly focussed on marketing and smooth talking whilst plucking the client for all they can.

John Hughman and Phil Oakley are starting up their own investment website. I hope they do podcasts too - they were always a good listen.

Phil Oakley wrote:

Will be returning to writing about shares and stuff next week. Am launching a new investment website for private investors with
@johnhughman. Watch this space.