Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Do you have a pension?

1…1516182021…31

Comments

  • #512
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 11,195 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    KomradeBishop wrote: »
    Yes I only answered the question on the exact same page it was asked...but don't let a false or misleading claim, get in the way of your or other posters desire, to try and get in a bit of point scoring.

    lol

    you did nothing of the sort, you said "I'll buy sum gud investments"

    I think tbh that such a genius manifesto ought have you barred from nonsense attacks on actual plans but hey it's a free thread and ppl will make up their own minds.


  • #513
    KomradeBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,981 ✭✭✭KomradeBishop


    Deleted User wrote: »
    lol

    you did nothing of the sort, you said "I'll buy sum gud investments"

    I think tbh that such a genius manifesto ought have you barred from nonsense attacks on actual plans but hey it's a free thread and ppl will make up their own minds.
    You're directly lying here as I never said that made up quote. In fact I said the exact opposite to your made up quote.

    Unsurprisingly, some posters are happy to just literally make shít up - pretending a poster said the exact opposite to what they actually said - in order to smear views they don't like and get in some point scoring; and other posters are happy to backslap that, just to rally around their 'side' in the debate - doesn't matter at all to them, if what they're backing is completely made up either.


  • #514
    ytpe2r5bxkn0c1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 32,688 ✭✭✭✭ytpe2r5bxkn0c1


    Deleted User wrote: »
    lol

    you did nothing of the sort, you said "I'll buy sum gud investments"

    I think tbh that such a genius manifesto ought have you barred from nonsense attacks on actual plans but hey it's a free thread and ppl will make up their own minds.
    KomradeBishop wrote: »
    You're directly lying here as I never said that made up quote. In fact I said the exact opposite to your made up quote.

    Just to be clear, the reply was
    I'd simply save the money and put it into useful assets
    I agree the paraphrasing was somewhat crude but the basic tenet appears to be the same.

    Where could you save that yields sufficient return to beat inflation, beat the tax incentives of a pension scheme and will provide sufficient to fill the gap in income after retirement? What are useful assets?

    Just genuinely asking.


  • #515
    KomradeBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,981 ✭✭✭KomradeBishop


    Ronnie Worried Workaholic wrote: »
    Just to be clear, the reply was
    I agree the paraphrasing was somewhat crude but the basic tenet appears to be the same.

    Where could you save that yields sufficient return to beat inflation, beat the tax incentives of a pension scheme and will provide sufficient to fill the gap in income after retirement? What are useful assets?

    Just genuinely asking.
    Oh look, quote-mining - where you deliberately left out other parts of the sentence - in the process, effectively lying about what I said:
    "I'd simply save the money and put it into useful assets - and steer well clear of investments"

    For someone who tries to use their 'intellectual trump card' a lot when it comes to financial knowledge, you aught to know the difference between assets and investments.

    A 'useful asset' like a home, is nothing like an investment like with your pension fund.


    I don't believe that you're 'genuinely asking' anything, when you deliberately lie by quote-mining me - and you and others aren't going to successfully brow-beat me into answering 'fishing' questions, where your only intent is to create opportunities to condescend, or to turn the question into a rhetorical attack by repeatedly demanding an answer, and trying to use that to attack credibility - when there is no honest intent behind the question.


  • #516
    ytpe2r5bxkn0c1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 32,688 ✭✭✭✭ytpe2r5bxkn0c1


    KomradeBishop wrote: »
    Oh look, quote-mining - where you deliberately left out other parts of the sentence - in the process, effectively lying about what I said:
    "I'd simply save the money and put it into useful assets - and steer well clear of investments"

    For someone who tries to use their 'intellectual trump card' a lot when it comes to financial knowledge, you aught to know the difference between assets and investments.

    A 'useful asset' like a home, is nothing like an investment like with your pension fund.


    I don't believe that you're 'genuinely asking' anything, when you deliberately lie by quote-mining me - and you and others aren't going to successfully brow-beat me into answering 'fishing' questions, where your only intent is to create opportunities to condescend, or to turn the question into a rhetorical attack by repeatedly demanding an answer, and trying to use that to attack credibility - when there is no honest intent behind the question.

    Ah look, I was genuinely asking. I left out the investment comment as you clearly said you'd avoid them. I don't know any other way to ask a simple question. I find it very disingenuous that you accuse me of lieing. That was not the intention nor the practice. Quote mining? I just quoted the piece that I would have liked more detail on. What is all this aggressive response about. You have used this "intellectual trump card" expression several times and I haven't a clue what you are getting at.
    I have savings and wonder what more I could do with them. I have a home and it's hopefully an asset for my kids but it doesn't help fund my retirement.
    Again, genuinely I was asking an honest question. The fact that you just attack
    and don't answer has me stumped.

    I'm finishing here now but will return to the question of pension funds; I paid in to a fund since I was 18. I watched how it was managed. I retired 17 years ago and have, as a result of that pension fund, a good income and a great life. I would recommend that everybody plans for retirement as best they can.

    OUT.


  • Advertisement
  • #517
    KomradeBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,981 ✭✭✭KomradeBishop


    Ronnie Worried Workaholic wrote: »
    Ah look, I was genuinely asking. I left out the investment comment as you clearly said you'd avoid them. I don't know any other way to ask a simple question. I find it very disingenuous that you accuse me of lieing. That was not the intention nor the practice. Quote mining? I just quoted the piece that I would have liked more detail on. What is all this aggressive response about. You have used this "intellectual trump card" expression several times and I haven't a clue what you are getting at.
    I have savings and wonder what more I could do with them. I have a home and it's hopefully an asset for my kids but it doesn't help fund my retirement.
    Again, genuinely I was asking an honest question. The fact that you just attack
    and don't answer has me stumped.

    I'm finishing here now but will return to the question of pension funds; I paid in to a fund since I was 18. I watched how it was managed. I retired 17 years ago and have, as a result of that pension fund, a good income and a great life. I would recommend that everybody plans for retirement as best they can.

    OUT.
    Sorry but you don't deserve benefit of the doubt - and anyway, lets stick to the topic, this is not an interview of me or my financial recommendations.

    This is the third time you've 'bowed out' of replying to me as well, so lets see if you stick to it this time.
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=96747492&postcount=445
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=96786092&postcount=493

    You obviously aren't interested in 'bowing out', you're just using it as a rhetorical tactic to try and make a "oh he's not worth replying to" show of condescending towards me - you're going to continue posting/backslapping to get a bit of point scoring in wherever you can.

    Are you really 'out' this time? Honest question, not at all rhetorical or feigning a genuine question...:rolleyes:


  • #518
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 11,195 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    anyway it'd be nice to discuss pensions and not people who don't want a pension

    I'm a member of a mandatory db scheme which is obviously a great bonus, that's that sorted. I might look at avc's as a good tax-efficient boost between now and the far-flung retirement date but other than that there's not much for me to do.


  • #519
    kazamo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 843 ✭✭✭kazamo


    Deleted User wrote: »
    anyway it'd be nice to discuss pensions and not people who don't want a pension

    I'm a member of a mandatory db scheme which is obviously a great bonus, that's that sorted. I might look at avc's as a good tax-efficient boost between now and the far-flung retirement date but other than that there's not much for me to do.

    To paint every poster who had anything critical to say about pensions as not wanting them is wrong imo.
    If DB schemes were available to all posters here, then we probably wouldn't be having any discussion.

    From what I have seen so far, the only posters who seem to see pensions as a fantastic way of providing for retirement appear to be either pension brokers or in DB schemes.

    To try and move the conversation away from any criticism of pensions may well do a disservice to anyone in a DC scheme who may be unaware of the likely ticking timebomb in their own pension pot, or perhaps half a pot.
    Better to hear the negative views now than at age 68.


  • #520
    draiochtanois
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,655 ✭✭✭draiochtanois


    This post has been deleted.


  • #521
    kazamo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 843 ✭✭✭kazamo


    draiochtanois wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    Investing in pensions is along the same lines but with tax relief.

    Not for a minute saying they do a great job at it and if we trained a chimpanzee to throw darts at stock market tips, would probably be just as effective.

    Whether it's your approach or the pension industry approach, don't have any issue per se about either, it's the huge amount needed to be invested that bothers me particularly if doing it 100% solo.
    How many will have a fund of a least 1m on retirement which would be needed for a 30k pension which has the spending power of probably 10k today.


  • Advertisement
  • #522
    FURET
    Closed Accounts Posts: 685 ✭✭✭FURET


    draiochtanois wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    Yes - to me a private "pension" is just a tax-efficient high-fee wrapper for such an investment to shield against regular taxation. Of course, in addition to wrapping the investment tax-efficiently, it also has the undesirable effect of mystifying the whole process and introducing a parasitical middle-man, and it removes the individual's power over their own wealth for potentially decades.

    In my libertarianesque view, people should be empowered to manage their own finances and investments prudently in the now rather than for the future - so scrap capital gains and dividend tax for a start. That, or scrap corporation tax. Corporations are owned by shareholders. So the shareholders are three-times taxed on the same investment: they indirectly pay corporation tax (which diminishes share price and dividends receivable), they directly pay capital gains tax, and they directly pay dividend withholding tax. This is utterly wealth-destroying for an average investor.

    The reality is that all of these taxes are here to stay (because people are becoming ever more dependent on Government for everything, not less); so for most people, a pension really is the only option, lest they get creamed on taxes otherwise.


  • #523
    draiochtanois
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,655 ✭✭✭draiochtanois


    This post has been deleted.


  • #524
    KomradeBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,981 ✭✭✭KomradeBishop


    Here's a good article on how pension funds in the US, are fleecing people investing in them - with a focus on the high fees - and echo'ing the problems with commissions that I mentioned:
    ...fees are indefensibly high, in large measure because the firms push actively managed products when passive strategies (index funds) deliver the same or better returns as much lower cost, making a huge difference in the amount investors realize. Comparatively few brokers and financial advisors are fiduciaries; many are on commission or get kickbacks or other incentives for selling high-fee products.
    ...
    MARTIN SMITH: Bogle gave me an example. Assume you’re invested in a fund that is earning a gross annual return of 7 percent. They charge you a 2 percent annual fee. Over 50 years, the difference between your net of 5 percent — the red line — and what you would have made without fees — the green line — is staggering.

    Bogle says you’ve lost almost two thirds of what you would have had.

    JOHN BOGLE: What happens in the fund business is the magic of compound returns is overwhelmed by the tyranny of compounding costs. It’s a mathematical fact. There’s no getting around it. The fact that we don’t look at it— too bad for us.

    Boogle’s assumptions are actually charitable. Remember, the fees come out of the account regardless of whether the investment performs. There have been entire decades (the 70s and the decade just past) where stock market returns went sideways. Moreover, that 2% is simply a typical figure. Some products often feature even higher levels of gouging. For instance, Smith interviews an investor who got into an annuity with high annual charges and a 10% exit fee.
    ...
    http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/04/even-harsh-frontline-program-on-retirement-investments-understates-how-bad-they-are.html

    Who here has any idea, how high the fees are on their pensions, or what the compounded cost of those fees will be on the overall pension?

    Here is an article outlining how - in Ireland - these fees can take up a full third of your entire pension (or even half of it, in extreme cases):
    http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/charlie-weston/charlie-weston-high-pension-fees-can-swallow-up-onethird-of-your-retirement-fund-28823430.html

    A further article on Ireland, outlining the lack of transparency in the pension industry - especially with fees:
    The report says that while every pension fund scheme member is by law entitled to receive an annual pension statement outlining the charges levied on their savings, almost two-thirds of trustees said they had difficulty getting some of the information on charges required for the report.

    The study found that there was no evidence of a culture in the pensions industry of providing clear information in a simple manner.
    http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1025080.shtml


    There is plenty of reason to be wary of people, trying to downplay criticism of pensions - especially when they come from the financial industry (i.e. they will be coming from the industry profiting from these huge fees, so they have an incentive to 'big up' pensions, and downplay criticism).

    Be extremely suspicious of anyone trying to 'sell' or 'big up' a pension, by emphasizing it's massive benefits, without also stating any of the massive risks if you don't know what you're doing; never 'leave it to the experts' to figure this out for you, because they have financial incentives to screw you. Research all of the frauds/scams in the industry yourself, and all of the deceitful practices.


  • #525
    FURET
    Closed Accounts Posts: 685 ✭✭✭FURET


    KomradeBishop wrote: »
    Here's a good article on how pension funds in the US, are fleecing people investing in them - with a focus on the high fees - and echo'ing the problems with commissions that I mentioned...

    Your points in this post are unassailable. Any pension that is high-cost and actively managed is a bad pension.

    I always put this example to people:
    Low-cost scenario:
    You invest 600 euro per month every month for 30 years in a self-managed pension consisting of two ETFs:
    • 80% FTSE World Stock Index (Expense Ratio 0.2%)
    • 20% Total Bond Market (Expense Ratio 0.2%)

    Your total cost is 0.2%
    Your investments averaged 9% per annum before cost, or 8.8% after cost.
    Value after 30 years: 1,036,268

    High-Cost Scenario:
    You invest 600 euro per month every month for 30 years in a managed pension consisting of two funds:
    • 80% World Stock Index (Expense Ratio 1%)
    • 20% Bond Market (Expense Ratio 1%)

    There is an annual management cost of 1%. Your total cost, therefore, is 2% (weighted expense ratio plus annual management charge)
    Your investments averaged 9% per annum before cost, or 7% after cost.
    Value after 30 years: 732,293
    300k right there went to some oily reprobate. Small percentages have a huge cost over time.


  • #526
    draiochtanois
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,655 ✭✭✭draiochtanois


    This post has been deleted.


  • #527
    FURET
    Closed Accounts Posts: 685 ✭✭✭FURET


    draiochtanois wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    Sadly it is better. Ultimately it is a matter of:
    • Competition in the private pensions industry (Bogle's Vanguard - a very ethical and low-cost institution in fairness - have set up shop in the UK, Netherlands, France and Iceland, but have yet to make it to Ireland as a provider of institutional pensions)
    • A more conscientious and informed consumer (little chance of this. Most people are useless with money)


  • #528
    Mango Joe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,178 ✭✭✭Mango Joe


    nelly17 wrote: »
    My big fear is that by the time reitirement comes we will have hit rock bottom again and the government will have introduced legislation that says if you have a private pension you are not entitled to the state pension, a lifetime of work and taxes down the drain

    Ah crap - Doesn't this just seem like a very likely scenario?????


  • #529
    KomradeBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,981 ✭✭✭KomradeBishop


    Good article I saw a short while ago about financial advisor scammers, advising clients into shítty/risky investments due to conflicts of interest - these guys are everywhere, and seem to be tacitly promoted by the finance industry:
    http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2016/03/01/2154793/the-financial-adviser-scammers/

    Reminded me bigtime of the brief craze of "don't have a pension yet? your mad! by the way, here are the benefits I enjoy from my *insert pension details here*" here on Boards - smelled badly of bullshít promotion if I'm honest.


  • #530
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    KomradeBishop wrote: »
    Good article I saw a short while ago about financial advisor scammers, advising clients into shítty/risky investments due to conflicts of interest - these guys are everywhere, and seem to be tacitly promoted by the finance industry:
    http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2016/03/01/2154793/the-financial-adviser-scammers/

    Reminded me bigtime of the brief craze of "don't have a pension yet? your mad! by the way, here are the benefits I enjoy from my *insert pension details here*" here on Boards - smelled badly of bullshít promotion if I'm honest.
    I hope you're at least paying into some kind of pension. I think you're roughly the same age as me, public pensions won't be a thing when we reach 65. (or more likely 75)


  • #531
    KomradeBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,981 ✭✭✭KomradeBishop


    I disagree - and as I said after the last thread, I'm done debating with you, due to your habit of making 'devils advocate' style arguments even you can't credibly believe - I'm of the opinion that you try to obstruct debate, not add to it.


  • Advertisement
  • #532
    draiochtanois
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,655 ✭✭✭draiochtanois


    This post has been deleted.


  • #533
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 22,384 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Nope, and no intention of getting one. Have had about 10 uncles and aunts who keeled over in the 65-70 bracket and really don't want to sit out the twilight years sucking Werthers and gardening.


  • #534
    valoren
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,607 ✭✭✭valoren


    I don't have a pension. I set up a PRSA but then realised that US dividends are still taxed so that defeat's the purpose of using a tax shelter. I also like the idea of having instant access to my capital. I closed the PRSA during the cooling off period. They didn't realise I was still within the month's cooling off period and sent me a curt reply stating I couldn't access my initial funding deposit until I was 50. Eh, no thanks.

    My basic plan for retiring is to focus on the income derived from the best companies on the planet.
    I want to reach the point where my dividend income from being a part owner in these companies can reasonably cover my quarterly expenses. I can continue to work if I wish but it would not be a necessity.

    I have picked a list of companies that;

    Must have a strong competitive advantage. (they should still be trading when I'm approaching 60+).
    Must have paid a dividend for at least 25 years. (you can't fake paying billions of cash to shareholders, so there's no potential insider fraud)
    Must have increased the dividend for at least a minimum of 10 years. (shows that the management is shareholder friendly).
    They must not be financial or technology companies. (the last two crashes/recessions were tech and financial, tech companies generally don't pay dividends).
    I must be able to understand the business. (so no such thing as Flux Capacitor Technologies trading at 100+ times earnings)

    Buffett - Only buy something that you’d be perfectly happy to hold if the market shut down for 10 years

    I have invested where the price/earnings is attractive for 6 companies so far.
    The turmoil earlier in the year got me 2 of these for a great price.
    Some are still unjustifiably overvalued but I will monitor these before making an investment.
    I plan to just spend the rest of my working life accumulating shares in 10-20 of these types of companies.
    They are spread across the sectors to diversify (Beverages, Energy, Healthcare, Consumer, Comglomerate, Utilities, Telecoms).
    As the dividends increase I simply add in additional capital to purchase more shares.
    When the dividends meet my living expenses then I can retire.
    I use a regular trading account so that the cash is readily available if absolutely necessary.
    It would need to be a very good reason for me to sell my holdings. I would plan on passing these holdings on after I die so no worry about capital gain tax.
    Market 'crashes' are my friend as I'm still young. So long as I had the capital to invest immediately then a market crash of 50% wouldn't bother me. I would have the opportunity to buy the companies I like at a heavy discount, after all they should still be around when I hit my 60's.

    Essentially it boils down to Buffett when he said "When we own portions of outstanding businesses with outstanding managements, our favorite holding period is forever.".

    It's beautifully simple and cuts out all the bullshi+ noise you see everyday about the markets.


  • #535
    lawred2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,777 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    One More Toy wrote: »
    Was sitting around at work talking about it, I was the only one of my colleagues to have one set up, and contributing the maximum, why is there such disregard in the Irish population towards private pensions? The state one wont provide the greatest of living standards yet people put it off, even into their forties:eek:

    nah

    had a workplace pension in my twenties with a MN... Remember sitting in on a trustees meeting (2006 or so) and being told that the fund was currently 75k and at current levels of contribution and growth; I'd be looking at a fund of 800k - 1m at retirement.

    Bonza I said.

    I moved on in 2009. Pension fund was frozen at that point. Total fund value - 17k :rolleyes:

    2007 - 2009 had wiped it out

    Like many financial 'products' - pensions (outside of DB) are a nice mixture of a gamble and a scam.


  • #536
    lawred2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,777 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    valoren wrote: »
    I don't have a pension. I set up a PRSA but then realised that US dividends are still taxed so that defeat's the purpose of using a tax shelter. I also like the idea of having instant access to my capital. I closed the PRSA during the cooling off period. They didn't realise I was still within the month's cooling off period and sent me a curt reply stating I couldn't access my initial funding deposit until I was 50. Eh, no thanks.

    My basic plan for retiring is to focus on the income derived from the best companies on the planet.
    I want to reach the point where my dividend income from being a part owner in these companies can reasonably cover my quarterly expenses. I can continue to work if I wish but it would not be a necessity.

    I have picked a list of companies that;

    Must have a strong competitive advantage. (they should still be trading when I'm approaching 60+).
    Must have paid a dividend for at least 25 years. (you can't fake paying billions of cash to shareholders, so there's no potential insider fraud)
    Must have increased the dividend for at least a minimum of 10 years. (shows that the management is shareholder friendly).
    They must not be financial or technology companies. (the last two crashes/recessions were tech and financial, tech companies generally don't pay dividends).

    Buffett - Only buy something that you’d be perfectly happy to hold if the market shut down for 10 years

    I have invested where the price/earnings is attractive for 6 companies so far.
    The turmoil earlier in the year got me 2 of these for a great price.
    Some are still unjustifiably overvalued but I will monitor these before making an investment.
    I plan to just spend the rest of my working life accumulating shares in 10-20 of these types of companies.
    They are spread across the sectors to diversify (Beverages, Energy, Healthcare, Consumer, Comglomerate, Utilities, Telecoms).
    As the dividends increase I simply add in additional capital to purchase more shares.
    When the dividends meet my living expenses then I can retire.
    I use a regular trading account so that the cash is readily available if absolutely necessary.
    It would need to be a very good reason for me to sell my holdings. I would plan on passing these holdings on after I die so no worry about capital gain tax.
    Market 'crashes' are my friend as I'm still young. So long as I had the capital to invest immediately then a market crash of 50% wouldn't bother me. I would have the opportunity to buy the companies I like at a heavy discount, after all they should still be around when I hit my 60's.

    Essentially it boils down to Buffett when he said "When we own portions of outstanding businesses with outstanding managements, our favorite holding period is forever.".

    It's beautifully simple and cuts out all the bullshi+ noise you see everyday about the markets.

    This has maybe given me the kick up the arse I need.

    Is there an investor's forum on boards?


  • #537
    Squall Leonhart
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,794 ✭✭✭Squall Leonhart


    lawred2 wrote: »
    This has maybe given me the kick up the arse I need.

    Is there an investor's forum on boards?


    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=859

    Yup, there is!


  • #538
    sebcity
    Closed Accounts Posts: 546 ✭✭✭sebcity


    valoren wrote: »
    I don't have a pension. I set up a PRSA but then realised that US dividends are still taxed so that defeat's the purpose of using a tax shelter. I also like the idea of having instant access to my capital. I closed the PRSA during the cooling off period. They didn't realise I was still within the month's cooling off period and sent me a curt reply stating I couldn't access my initial funding deposit until I was 50. Eh, no thanks.

    My basic plan for retiring is to focus on the income derived from the best companies on the planet.
    I want to reach the point where my dividend income from being a part owner in these companies can reasonably cover my quarterly expenses. I can continue to work if I wish but it would not be a necessity.

    I have picked a list of companies that;

    Must have a strong competitive advantage. (they should still be trading when I'm approaching 60+).
    Must have paid a dividend for at least 25 years. (you can't fake paying billions of cash to shareholders, so there's no potential insider fraud)
    Must have increased the dividend for at least a minimum of 10 years. (shows that the management is shareholder friendly).
    They must not be financial or technology companies. (the last two crashes/recessions were tech and financial, tech companies generally don't pay dividends).

    Buffett - Only buy something that you’d be perfectly happy to hold if the market shut down for 10 years

    I have invested where the price/earnings is attractive for 6 companies so far.
    The turmoil earlier in the year got me 2 of these for a great price.
    Some are still unjustifiably overvalued but I will monitor these before making an investment.
    I plan to just spend the rest of my working life accumulating shares in 10-20 of these types of companies.
    They are spread across the sectors to diversify (Beverages, Energy, Healthcare, Consumer, Comglomerate, Utilities, Telecoms).
    As the dividends increase I simply add in additional capital to purchase more shares.
    When the dividends meet my living expenses then I can retire.
    I use a regular trading account so that the cash is readily available if absolutely necessary.
    It would need to be a very good reason for me to sell my holdings. I would plan on passing these holdings on after I die so no worry about capital gain tax.
    Market 'crashes' are my friend as I'm still young. So long as I had the capital to invest immediately then a market crash of 50% wouldn't bother me. I would have the opportunity to buy the companies I like at a heavy discount, after all they should still be around when I hit my 60's.

    Essentially it boils down to Buffett when he said "When we own portions of outstanding businesses with outstanding managements, our favorite holding period is forever.".

    It's beautifully simple and cuts out all the bullshi+ noise you see everyday about the markets.

    Can you give an example of stock you bought and are happy with?


  • #539
    valoren
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,607 ✭✭✭valoren


    sebcity wrote: »
    Can you give an example of stock you bought and are happy with?

    I increased my Johnson and Johnson holding for example on the 18th Febraury.
    I figure that any index fund will have some of their shares in their holdings so I just cut out the middleman and go straight there essentially.

    The price was $103.95. The pe ratio was attractive at 18.91.
    Anything less than 20 price earnings for a boring old stock like that is good.
    Anything over is ok too. You still own a brilliant company but you'd be paying a premium for it essentially. Anything under 20 and it's a bargain for me.
    I'll be now paid €160 for the year from them as a part 'owner'. I can then reinvest it for more shares or use that cash and use it towards another company. It's wash rinse repeat stuff. It's now $106 but if it dropped to $50 I'd be jumping over myself to buy more, MORE!
    My share number would still be the same and the dividend would still be .75c every 3 months this year.

    The only problem is that you can't just buy a couple of shares at a time on something like computershare. You need to hold your cash back to make a sizeable investment because the charges/commissions are high (circa €42 per trade for US shares for example). A €1000 trade and you're down 4.2% right off the bat. :(


  • #540
    KomradeBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,981 ✭✭✭KomradeBishop


    While valoren's investment plan definitely sounds like a fairly sensible one, simple and avoiding the complexity/opacity (i.e. scammability) of other financial investments, the problem I would have is finding companies which are that strong/solid - yet which aren't plagued with some ethical issue or other - because ethical issues are going to be prevalent among a large number of the most successful/long-term-stable companies (though not all by any means - I'd be curious about the few good pickings).

    That is also one of the big problems with many pension schemes: When you look at where the money is actually being invested, at the list of companies being invested in etc., you usually don't have to spend long looking, before you find some companies which have serious/major ethical issues that your money will be getting invested in.


  • Advertisement
  • #541
    KomradeBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,981 ✭✭✭KomradeBishop


    valoren wrote: »
    I increased my Johnson and Johnson holding for example on the 18th Febraury.
    ...
    Good example of what I meant, about it being hard to find a company that solid/successful, which doesn't have ethical issues - a whole host of things wrong with J&J, starting from here on down:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnson_%26_Johnson#2010_Hip_replacement_recall


Advertisement