Investing 100-150k to realise an income?

Zipppy

I wonder what's best options when having 100-150k to invest?
I'm more seeking a monthly / annual income from this...

eg buy a small house /apt outside Dublin and rent out..even after tax USC etc I'd probably realise maybe 300 per month...would this be madness? Obviously price of property could fall and then I lose overall.

Shares?

Deposits give practically nought..

Should I go see a financial advisor? if so where do you find an honest one ?

FURET

Zipppy wrote: »

Should I go see a financial advisor? if so where do you find an honest one ?

No you should not. Full stop.

The J Stands for Jay

Zipppy wrote: »

would this be madness?

Yes.

If you were looking at shates , etfs or something of that type, your income wouldn't be monthly. Dividend are usually paid twice a year.

arrowloopboy

Maybe invest E15.00 first,and buy Bogleheads ,by John Bogle ,and take it from their ,f/as don't really care if you make money ,just as long as they do!

Blue Steel

How about buying a house/appt and rent it out through an agency (Remax, ..).

They would take a fee (10%) but they would take care of everything from finding the tenants to dealing with all sorts.

FURET

Blue Steel wrote: »

How about buying a house/appt and rent it out through an agency (Remax, ..).

They would take a fee (10%) but they would take care of everything from finding the tenants to dealing with all sorts.

A bad idea in fairness. Completely undiversified, high risk, and costly. If property is on the cards, investment in the iShares Eurostoxx REIT ETF would almost tripled your money over the past four years.

Blue Steel

FURET wrote: »

A bad idea in fairness. Completely undiversified, high risk, and costly. If property is on the cards, investment in the iShares eurotstoxx REIT ETF would have tripled your money over the past four years.

Aren't REIT like shares? ie: when the market will go down you're losing.
Can you have a monthly steady income with REIT? (OP's prerequisite.)

At least if you have invested in a real house/appt you still have a tenant/income.
Why would it be deemed "high risk" if the agency is dealing with the hassle.

If I am wrong please correct me.

FURET

I would say it is not realistic to expect any reasonable income to accrue from 100 - 150k. It is a solid principal though. I also don't think you would be able to buy a property that would yield more than 7% per annum after costs. Shares can be expected to yield 7% on average over reasonable periods, and the risk is diversified and there is a much lower cost associated with owning them. Finally, yes, REITS are shares but they behave somewhat differently to other shares in that they are rooted in a different asset class - real estate.

Nody

Blue Steel wrote: »

Aren't REIT like shares? ie: when the market will go down you're losing.
Can you have a monthly steady income with REIT? (OP's prerequisite.)

At least if you have invested in a real house/appt you still have a tenant/income.
Why would it be deemed "high risk" if the agency is dealing with the hassle.

If I am wrong please correct me.

You are wrong; I have a colleague who was working as expat and rented out his house in London through an agency. The agency insisted on taking all the rent until they had their fees paid for the duration of the lease out. Then when the tenants trashed the apartment and refused to pay rent they did not do more then send letters to them telling them to pay which they simply ignored. When they finally left the place was complete trashed require complete reconstruction of kitchen, bathrooms etc. far exceeding the deposit and stopping it being rented out for another six months. The agency simply shrugged and said if you want more you'll need to sue them in court; we did our part by finding people and sending on the money to you.

john_bane

FURET wrote: »

I would say it is not realistic to expect any reasonable income to accrue from 100 - 150k. It is a solid principal though. I also don't think you would be able to buy a property that would yield more than 7% per annum after costs. Shares can be expected to yield 7% on average over reasonable periods, and the risk is diversified and there is a much lower cost associated with owning them. Finally, yes, REITS are shares but they behave somewhat differently to other shares in that they are rooted in a different asset class - real estate.

their are hundreds of commercial properties for sale in this country for less than 150 k and with sitting tenants paying what amounts to a yield of well above 7% and in many cases close to 10%

very few public listed companies yield dividends of 7% per year , what you mean surely is capital appreciation of 7% per anum ?

FURET

john_bane wrote: »

their are hundreds of commercial properties for sale in this country for less than 150 k and with sitting tenants paying what amounts to a yield of well above 7% and in many cases close to 10%

very few public listed companies yield dividends of 7% per year , what you mean surely is capital appreciation of 7% per anum ?

If you can buy such a place outright for between 100 and 150k (with no mortgage), no need for redecoration, no need for furnishing, no need for upfront repairs or modernization, and you can gain 7% on an annual basis after insurance, property tax and tax on the rent, while accounting for periodic vacancy, then it might be prudent to put your money into such a property.

But, even if you manage that, your money is all in one basket, illiquid, and you never know if the next tenant will prove more trouble than they're worth.

I've said already that I don't believe 100 - 150k can be reasonably expected to yield a decent monthly income.

lucky john

How about forestry. 150,000 should get you close to 40 acres of suitable land. government grants will pay 100% of the planting and management costs for the first 4 years. From that you will get an annual payment, guaranteed and TAX FREE, for 15 years. I'm not sure of the exact premium now but close to €7700 i think. Thats €640 per month (tax free), you also have a nicely growing asset that in 30 ..40 years time will offer a very nice pension pot, again tax free. 40 acres of quality timber at todays prices could net you €400,000. figures are ball park but not far out either.

john_bane

FURET wrote: »

If you can buy such a place outright for between 100 and 150k (with no mortgage), no need for redecoration, no need for furnishing, no need for upfront repairs or modernization, and you can gain 7% on an annual basis after insurance, property tax and tax on the rent, while accounting for periodic vacancy, then it might be prudent to put your money into such a property.

But, even if you manage that, your money is all in one basket, illiquid, and you never know if the next tenant will prove more trouble than they're worth.

I've said already that I don't believe 100 - 150k can be reasonably expected to yield a decent monthly income.

then you are not up to date with the property market as a whole , there are countless commercial properties out there for under 150 k which will deliver a yield of more than 7% and up to 10% and there is no property tax to be paid on commercial property

as you used shares as a comparison , I am basing my figures on someone who would not take out a mortgage as you cannot borrow money to buy shares , effectively we are dealing with a cash buyer hypothetically

as for residential property , while IMO its not as good an investment as commercial , there are countless properties outside Dublin and galway ( both markets are crazy so exclude ) which will deliver a yield of over 7%

john_bane

lucky john wrote: »

How about forestry. 150,000 should get you close to 40 acres of suitable land. government grants will pay 100% of the planting and management costs for the first 4 years. From that you will get an annual payment, guaranteed and TAX FREE, for 15 years. I'm not sure of the exact premium now but close to €7700 i think. Thats €640 per month (tax free), you also have a nicely growing asset that in 30 ..40 years time will offer a very nice pension pot, again tax free. 40 acres of quality timber at todays prices could net you €400,000. figures are ball park but not far out either.

forestry pays no more than 220 euro per acre per year ( I think its actually been reduced to a lower amount actually ) , if you even get the land @ 5000 euro per acre , that's only a yield of a little over 4% , id prefer put the money in the oil company shell or Vodafone , both pay over 5% of a dividend

Nody

john_bane wrote: »

forestry pays no more than 220 euro per acre per year ( I think its actually been reduced to a lower amount actually ) , if you even get the land @ 5000 euro per acre , that's only a yield of a little over 4% , id prefer put the money in the oil company shell or Vodafone , both pay over 5% of a dividend

And that's not including the fact the forest needs to be thinned out several times as well from the planting until harvesting and before we start to talk about storm damage, fungus infections etc. that can easily ruin the investment.

FURET

john_bane wrote: »

then you are not up to date with the property market as a whole , there are countless commercial properties out there for under 150 k which will deliver a yield of more than 7% and up to 10% and there is no property tax to be paid on commercial property

as you used shares as a comparison , I am basing my figures on someone who would not take out a mortgage as you cannot borrow money to buy shares , effectively we are dealing with a cash buyer hypothetically

as for residential property , while IMO its not as good an investment as commercial , there are countless properties outside Dublin and galway ( both markets are crazy so exclude ) which will deliver a yield of over 7%

Even if all that is true, you have not diversified the investment and it is illiquid and therefore quite high risk. It is also an active management / high-cost investment. If the OP has a lot more money than 150k, and this is just loose change in his pocket, then no harm putting some into property imo. If however it represents pretty much all or most of his net worth, then I think he needs to rethink his whole strategy, sans financial advisor.

john_bane

FURET wrote: »

Even if all that is true, you have not diversified the investment and it is illiquid and therefore quite high risk. It is also an active management / high-cost investment. If the OP has a lot more money than 150k, and this is just loose change in his pocket, then no harm putting some into property imo. If however it represents pretty much all or most of his net worth, then I think he needs to rethink his whole strategy, sans financial advisor.

financial advisors are sales people in nine out of ten cases and know fcek all apart from spewing financial jargon

property has risen a lot in the past three years but its still cheaper than shares right now which are in the seventh year of a bull market

im actually a bigger fan of shares than property as an investment but the OP is looking to create an income stream and he will achieve this easier right now through property

Clareman

Say you have 120k to invest and go for a standard 4 bedroom semi for €550 somewhere. It'll cost you at least 10k to buy the house between fees, time, registrations, taxes, etc, that means you have to go a year and a half at least to get your 10k back, that's not taking into account any new furniture or appliances you have to get for the house, what happens if a pipe bursts and you have to re-do the whole house? You'll have no rental income and will have to pay at least the excess.

Assuming you don't have a issue with the house, that buying it costs 10k, that nothing breaks or needs replacing and that you'll be paying 42% on the rental income, in 10 years time your 120k has earned you €28,280. You still have the value of the house of course.

Now, think of investing your 120k in the governments 10 year savings bond, in 10 years time you'll get 25% return (30k) and have access to the money whenever you need it (with 7 days notice).

Looking for a regular income from an amount like 150k will require a lot of work or a lot of risk taking.

john_bane

Clareman wrote: »

Say you have 120k to invest and go for a standard 4 bedroom semi for €550 somewhere. It'll cost you at least 10k to buy the house between fees, time, registrations, taxes, etc, that means you have to go a year and a half at least to get your 10k back, that's not taking into account any new furniture or appliances you have to get for the house, what happens if a pipe bursts and you have to re-do the whole house? You'll have no rental income and will have to pay at least the excess.

Assuming you don't have a issue with the house, that buying it costs 10k, that nothing breaks or needs replacing and that you'll be paying 42% on the rental income, in 10 years time your 120k has earned you €28,280. You still have the value of the house of course.

Now, think of investing your 120k in the governments 10 year savings bond, in 10 years time you'll get 25% return (30k) and have access to the money whenever you need it (with 7 days notice).

Looking for a regular income from an amount like 150k will require a lot of work or a lot of risk taking.

if I could again suggest commercial property

upfront , you pay 13.5% vat + 2% stamp duty , after that the costs are on the tenant

industrial units are still very cheap and have not really recovered , there are plenty around the country with sitting tenants and yields reaching 10% in some cases , I should know , I walked away from buying one recently but not because of anything to do with the rent

residential property rarely gives a particulary high yield unless you buy an apartment and outside cities , apartment living is not all that popular and will unlikely grow much in value

if the OP was willing to settle for a yield of around 5% , Vodafone , shell , AT+T , Verizon , BP , all of the above are companies who are not going to go out of business anytime soon and have continued to pay dividends right throughout the financial crisis

tipparetops

If I had 100k, would buy shares in energy, precious metals or buy land.
Alternative Energy stock could be a good option.

john_bane

tipparetops wrote: »

If I had 100k, would buy shares in energy, precious metals or buy land.
Alternative Energy stock could be a good option.

farm land will deliver less return per year than sticking it in the bank , farm land is only a lucrative investment if you plan to start up a dairy farm

energy shares are cheap , precious metals are a speculative bet , they have no intrinsic value and pay no income

tipparetops

john_bane wrote: »

farm land will deliver less return per year than sticking it in the bank , farm land is only a lucrative investment if you plan to start up a dairy farm

energy shares are cheap , precious metals are a speculative bet , they have no intrinsic value and pay no income

What I am suggesting is more long term.
When i Say land, I mean close to an urban area and you rent to a dairy farmer.
All shares are speculative, but alternative energy and precious metals are good bets to see growth.

tipparetops

john_bane wrote: »

farm land will deliver less return per year than sticking it in the bank , farm land is only a lucrative investment if you plan to start up a dairy farm

energy shares are cheap , precious metals are a speculative bet , they have no intrinsic value and pay no income

What I am suggesting is more long term.
When i Say land, I mean close to an urban area and you rent to a dairy farmer.
All shares are speculative, but alternative energy and mining shares are good bets to see growth.

Harry Palmr

How about start a self drive van rental company. People in business always need a vehicle for short hire when they run out of capacity or have a vehicle off the road for maintenance, while domestic customers need vehicles for clearing out properties/sheds/moving a bed whatever it might be.

john_bane

tipparetops wrote: »

What I am suggesting is more long term.
When i Say land, I mean close to an urban area and you rent to a dairy farmer.
All shares are speculative, but alternative energy and precious metals are good bets to see growth.

all shares are not speculative and are no more a bet than property provided you diversify and above all have patience , precious metals are an inherently speculative bet

land beside urban areas costs a fortune and unless you get it zoned is never a good deal , and renting to a dairy farmer will at most earn you 250 euro per acre , what good is that if the land costs 15 k per acre to buy which would be cheap if its near an urban centre

john_bane

Harry Palmr wrote: »

How about start a self drive van rental company. People in business always need a vehicle for short hire when they run out of capacity or have a vehicle off the road for maintenance, while domestic customers need vehicles for clearing out properties/sheds/moving a bed whatever it might be.

sounds like an already crowded market

Blue Steel

requirements:
- safety
- immediate regular income (no long/mid term solutions)

summary of solutions:
- government saving bonds
- REIT
- shares with dividends
- house/appartment


details:
-government bonds
Tick the box of safety
Putting aside 120k for 10 years will yield 30k which represents 250e / month only
Doesn't seem to tick the boxes of regular income

- house/appartment
Tick the box of regular income
Doesn't tick the box of safety (tenants can ruin the house and there is no guaranty)

- shares with dividends
What would 120k spread over a handful of such shares return
What is the risk

- REIT
This is like shares, you can lose your money in case of a crash (as opposed to owning a house)
What return
What risk
Does it tick the box of regular income?

FURET

Blue Steel wrote: »

- REIT
This is like shares, you can lose your money in case of a crash (as opposed to owning a house)
What return
What risk
Does it tick the box of regular income?

I was not suggesting a REIT. I was simply using the example of a REIT to demonstrate that if real estate is a desired investment, you'd be better off buying a REIT than a single apartment, though it would not generate a regular income. However over the past four years it would have grown your 150k into around 500k with less risk and less cost. Past performance doesn't mean much though in fairness.

John Bane's solution might be the best one - though it is undiversified and needs to be actively managed. I will state again that 150k is not much money to begin with.

We have not asked the OP what income he would like to obtain from this 150k.
We have also not asked him why he wants to obtain a monthly income from this principal.

For me it all depends on his net worth and overall financial goals.

Blue Steel

FURET wrote: »

John Bane's solution might be the best one - though it is undiversified and needs to be actively managed.

John Bane was saying that 5% return could be done using shares yielding dividends.

Would a good compromise overall be: invest 100k in shares and remainder in REIT?

FURET wrote: »

We have not asked the OP what income he would like to obtain from this 150k.
We have also not asked him why he wants to obtain a monthly income from this principal.

For me it all depends on his net worth and overall financial goals.

3 options:
- compound interests (re-inject the earnings into investment).
- extra income from already existing income.
- only source of income (assuming no mortgage/rent/loans/...)

option 3 seems to be the most difficult to resolve because it needs to be of a consistent minimum value obviously: could one live on 800 net / month (for example) and how much money do you need upfront to generate this.

FURET wrote: »

I will state again that 150k is not much money to begin with.

How much would be ideal to start?

FURET

Blue Steel wrote: »

John Bane was saying that 5% return could be done using shares yielding dividends.

Well, yes, in theory, but: Very few companies pay a 5% dividend. When buying shares, you ideally buy hundreds or even thousands simultaneously (buying just 10 or 20 is very risky imo). The principal will not hold steady and may appreciate or depreciate in the medium term. Tax will be due on dividends received.

I'll give you an example. I have 400k euro invested in the VEUR ETF of European shares. Last year that yielded me around 17k euro in dividends (My S&P 500 ETF yielded me even less in dividends despite being of similar size). I reside in a tax-free jurisdiction so I did not have to pay tax on that. Needless to say 17k is not a sufficient annual income for me (I spend about 30k annually) so I simply reinvested the dividends as I always do and lived off my salary. You can imagine what 100k would yield in dividends after tax!

That said, it would be more tax efficient for the OP to buy individual shares than an ETF, but he is very unlikely to get a better return with hand-picked stocks than with a wide-ranging ETF like VEUR. And as mentioned, he will not get a very big annual income if he's relying on dividends.

Would a good compromise overall be: invest 100k in shares and remainder in REIT?

IMO that would be overweighting the REIT. To be honest I would put the whole lot into diversified stocks (ideally a tax-sheltered ETF). Rather than living off whatever dividends pay out, I would reinvest the dividends and continue to invest fresh money regularly. As John Bane said, stock valuations have risen since 2009 but trying to time the market is foolish. Formulate a plan and stick to it.

3 options:
- compound interests (re-inject the earnings into investment).
- extra income from already existing income.
- only source of income (assuming no mortgage/rent/loans/...)

option 3 seems to be the most difficult to resolve because it needs to be of a consistent minimum value obviously: could one live on 800 net / month (for example) and how much money do you need upfront to generate this.

If the OP is relying on the 150k to generate his only source of income, he can forget it unless he sleeps in a tent and catches his food with a fishing rod. Therefore he is looking at either using the 100k as a principal, investing it for the long term in stocks and reinvesting dividends while adding fresh money to it (like a retirement pot) while forgetting about earning income from it for now; OR doing what John Bane suggests.

If the OP is young and doesn't have a lot of money beyond this 150k, then I would forget about using it for income and simply invest it now so that it can compound over the next 20 years or so before he retires. If he has a decent bit of money and doesn't mind lack of diversification, John Bane's suggestion is certainly worthy of further investigation.

How much would be ideal to start?

Any amount is an ideal starting point. The real question is not what you start with, but what you want to finish with.

alb

A couple of other things to keep in mind: In Ireland, if you are in the higher tax bracket you will pay less tax on capital gains on stocks than dividends i.e. a stock paying a 3% dividend where the stock value stayed the same is worse for you than a stock that paid no dividend but rose 3% in the same time.
Also, ETF gains are taxed higher than regular stock gains, and you're subject to that stupid 8 year rule.

ixus

What's your skillset? Could you do with improving this through education?

How can you take your expertise to the next level?

If you're PAYE, ever thought of setting up your own company? There's a redesigned scheme with tax rebates:

New tax refund scheme for start ups

A new tax refund scheme for start ups has been announced today by Finance Minister Michael Noonan and Jobs Minister Richard Bruton.

The scheme, called Start Up Refunds for Entrepreneurs (SURE), means entrepreneurs will be able to claim a tax refund of up to 41% of the capitol they invest in starting their business.
[/url]

Locking up 100K+ for a 300pm return seems illogical to me.

Invest in something you "know" rather than thinking a 100K is burning a hole in your pocket. If you need to sit and wait for that to come along, do so.

Zipppy

ixus wrote: »

What's your skillset? Could you do with improving this through education?

How can you take your expertise to the next level?

Hi all OP here

Many thanks for all the replies..i've been following from afar

re skillset / further education...I'm PAYE and at MSc level and have been considering a Phd..I suppose I could go career break and use money to fund myself for 4/5 years...only issue there is that Phd would take a long time, if ever, to repay my lump sum...no guarantees of a job even with a Phd and it wouldnt help me in current role at all.

I'm not seeking to live off any income stream, simply to supplement my salary..5% after tax would be great..

I'll keep reading and weighing up my options...

Thanks again for all the input..

FURET

Zipppy wrote: »

Hi all OP here

Many thanks for all the replies..i've been following from afar

re skillset / further education...I'm PAYE and at MSc level and have been considering a Phd..I suppose I could go career break and use money to fund myself for 4/5 years...only issue there is that Phd would take a long time, if ever, to repay my lump sum...no guarantees of a job even with a Phd and it wouldnt help me in current role at all.

I'm not seeking to live off any income stream, simply to supplement my salary..5% after tax would be great..

I'll keep reading and weighing up my options...

Thanks again for all the input..

If you are monetarily focused, think carefully about the PhD as well. It too is an investment and often a very bad one in terms of opportunity cost. It sounds like you are young. Why not put the 150k into a low cost pension and let it compound over the next 25 or 30 years, at which time it will probably have grown to 814,000 (25 years) or 1,140,000 euro (30 years). You don't need it to produce an income so to get the maximum return invest it now for the long term. In 30 years you will be delighted that you put it away and forgot about it.

Zipppy

FURET wrote: »

If you are monetarily focused, think carefully about the PhD as well. It too is an investment and often a very bad one in terms of opportunity cost. It sounds like you are young. Why not put the 150k into a low cost pension and let it compound over the next 25 or 30 years, at which time it will probably have grown to 814,000 (25 years) or 1,140,000 euro (30 years). You don't need it to produce an income so to get the maximum return invest it now for the long term. In 30 years you will be delighted that you put it away and forgot about it.

HAHA..in 30 years I'll be dead probably (Ok so I'm not young )

FURET

Zipppy wrote: »

HAHA..in 30 years I'll be dead probably (Ok so I'm not young )

Hehe, alrighty. In that case the question of what to do with the 150k comes down to your overall net worth and retirement planning status in my opinion. I have no idea what your net worth is - but the older you get, the more conservative you should be with your money, unless you have a high net worth. I would guess (perhaps wrongly!) that your net worth isn't all that high. If it were, you probably would not have started this thread. So: Calculate what you will need in retirement. If you're already comfortable in terms of retirement preparation, you can afford to dabble. If however your retirement pot is not currently where it needs to be, I would not spend the 150k; I would rather invest it.

paisley2

Zipppy wrote: »

HAHA..in 30 years I'll be dead probably (Ok so I'm not young )

That could be the answer to your question !!
It never ceases to amaze me how many people scrimp and scrape most of their working life and put away money in 'investments' and savings for a rainy day. Then they die leaving all of it to their family. Ideally one should leave this world exactly as you enter it, penniless!! Now that's true money management skills.

A worth while exercise for all investors (and potential investors) is to make a guess of the date of your death and calculate your spending backwards from there. If you live another 20 years, the €150k equates to €7500 per year. Thats a nice cruise every year for the next 20 years. Think about what would be better for you personally, €300 a month or a cruise every year?

Maybe you should buy a small retirement cottage or apartment in a country you always wanted to retire to and use the €150k to retire 10 years early

There is an assumption that lump sums of money should be 'invested' because thats what you are 'supposed' to do because its responsible and mature. I am not saying you just go out and blow it, of course not, I am just saying to think about what you want the money to do for you :cool:

Buy a blue chip share like BP. It will pay you 5% to 6% with the prospect of increasing income and a capital gain. And unlike property there is no hassle and you can cash out at any time.

Diarmuid

Blue Steel wrote: »

- REIT
This is like shares, you can lose your money in case of a crash (as opposed to owning a house)
What return
What risk
Does it tick the box of regular income?

If a REIT crashes in value, it's because the underlying asset has crashed. ie a property crash. Why would the value of the house you own not also crash in a property crash?

FURET

paisley2 wrote: »

A worth while exercise for all investors (and potential investors) is to make a guess of the date of your death and calculate your spending backwards from there. If you live another 20 years, the €150k equates to €7500 per year. Thats a nice cruise every year for the next 20 years. Think about what would be better for you personally, €300 a month or a cruise every year?

Sorry, this is risible stuff. Guess the date of your death and work backwards? Impossible. You also have not factored in inflation. This is how you calculate what you need for retirement.

Zipppy

TBH, and maybe it's just me, I've really no interest in retirement savings etc..
I will have two pensiona (no very big but ok) plus will get a pension lump sum and have another lump invested ...and i'll be old and not doing as much as I do now..I could be dead next week for gawds sake..will I live to see 65 or 70 or whatever? who knows.
I do know I'm here now and I'd like to live well....without blowing it all as maybe I will live to a ripe old age and regret it
So the plan was to get some extra income NOW, retain my lump sum to use in emergencies...feck retirement

paisley2

FURET wrote: »

Sorry, this is risible stuff. Guess the date of your death and work backwards? Impossible. You also have not factored in inflation. This is how you calculate what you need for retirement.

Ah please work with me here FURET...you are missing the point, think beyond that.
I know we can't predict our death.
I know how to factor in inflation (or dis-inflation these days).
I know the retirement calculations.
Lets take all that as given and assume everyone knows that.

My point is you CAN'T calculate what you need for retirement because the calculation is not about money. There is an unexamined assumption that if you throw enough money into 'the future' you will be ok, but we never actually get to that future and we never fully enjoy the fruits of our savings & investments.

Blue Steel

Diarmuid wrote: »

If a REIT crashes in value, it's because the underlying asset has crashed. ie a property crash. Why would the value of the house you own not also crash in a property crash?

The value of the house would be lesser but you still have a tangible asset and you can still rent it out.

I still believe that owning a real house / appt is better than digits on a computer. I cannot believe that investors are afraid just because of reckless tenants. There has to be a solution to this.

Is there any country where likelihood of bad tenants would be low or where agencies offer garanties?

paisley2 wrote: »

There is an assumption that lump sums of money should be 'invested' because thats what you are 'supposed' to do

If you don't invest your money melts away because of inflation and DiRT. There is no other choice but to invest.

For ever odd

paisley2 wrote: »

That could be the answer to your question !!
It never ceases to amaze me how many people scrimp and scrape most of their working life and put away money in 'investments' and savings for a rainy day. Then they die leaving all of it to their family. Ideally one should leave this world exactly as you enter it, penniless!! Now that's true money management skills.

A worth while exercise for all investors (and potential investors) is to make a guess of the date of your death and calculate your spending backwards from there. If you live another 20 years, the €150k equates to €7500 per year. Thats a nice cruise every year for the next 20 years. Think about what would be better for you personally, €300 a month or a cruise every year?

Maybe you should buy a small retirement cottage or apartment in a country you always wanted to retire to and use the €150k to retire 10 years early

There is an assumption that lump sums of money should be 'invested' because thats what you are 'supposed' to do because its responsible and mature. I am not saying you just go out and blow it, of course not, I am just saying to think about what you want the money to do for you :cool:

Now that's a post and a half, made me laugh!

As my dear old granddad used to tell me, the best investments you will ever make are a comfortable bed and comfortable shoes, after that everything falls into place.

Boy,could that man make money and have fun!

FURET

Blue Steel wrote: »

I still believe that owning a real house / appt is better than digits on a computer.

When you own stocks, you own something as real as the ground you're standing on. Every time I pass by a busy Starbucks, see someone drive an Audi, drink a Pepsi, watch a Disney movie, post on Facebook from their iPhone or Android device, board an Airbus, grab a KFC, consume a Kit Kat or buy a packet of contraceptive pills, I see my businesses making money. These are real, active businesses making money 24/7, every day of the year, in every city and every town of every country on the planet. They're not just squiggly lines on a chart.

FURET

FURET wrote: »

When you own stocks, you own something as real as the ground you're standing on. Every time I pass by a busy Starbucks, see someone drive an Audi, drink a Pepsi, watch a Disney movie, post on Facebook from their iPhone or Android device, board an Airbus, grab a KFC, consume a Kit Kat or buy a packet of contraceptive pills, I see my businesses making money. These are real, active businesses making money 24/7, every day of the year, in every city and every town of every country on the planet. They're not just squiggly lines on a chart.

Half the economic problems in Ireland are caused by people believing that property is a better investment than stocks. Its not.

The Government should encourage wealth creation through stock ownership. It will be far better for everybody than the present focus on property.

For ever odd

FURET wrote: »

When you own stocks, you own something as real as the ground you're standing on. Every time I pass by a busy Starbucks, see someone drive an Audi, drink a Pepsi, watch a Disney movie, post on Facebook from their iPhone or Android device, board an Airbus, grab a KFC, consume a Kit Kat or buy a packet of contraceptive pills, I see my businesses making money. These are real, active businesses making money 24/7, every day of the year, in every city and every town of every country on the planet. They're not just squiggly lines on a chart.

Cocoa
Merc
Coke
Popcorn
Sad
Rolls Royce
Fat ( chicken producers)
Cocoa
Do you Really you watch people buy contraceptive pills, that's sad.

We all see the squiggly lines differently.

For ever odd

For ever odd wrote: »

Do you Really you watch people buy contraceptive pills, that's sad.

.

You won't go far wrong with Big Pharma, Big tobacco and Big Oil. Seriously.

The J Stands for Jay

Blue Steel wrote: »

I still believe that owning a real house / appt is better than digits on a computer.

An apartment isn't that real a thing. Its just a lease for less than 100 years on a space between four walls in a big building. A share in a company means you own part of a business and all of its assets and earnings into perpetuity.

The_Pretender

McGaggs wrote: »

An apartment isn't that real a thing. Its just a lease for less than 100 years on a space between four walls in a big building. A share in a company means you own part of a business and all of its assets and earnings into perpetuity.

Think it should be less than 1000 years no?

The J Stands for Jay

The_Pretender wrote: »

Think it should be less than 1000 years no?

Only if you're Arthur Guinness.