Superannuation Investment Returns
Printed From: Thoroughbred Village
Category: Community - Public Forums
Forum Name: General
Forum Description: Thoughts about anything and everything
URL: https://forum.thoroughbredvillage.com.au/forum_posts.asp?TID=50503
Printed Date: 17 Apr 2024 at 9:39am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.05 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Superannuation Investment Returns
Posted By: Ecair Issoire
Subject: Superannuation Investment Returns
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 10:51am
|
Just an observation..
over the last 18 months, as an example.
With the fund that i'm a member of (aus super), again as an example.
these have been the returns from 01/01/2013 to 16/07/2014.
Balanced 23.03%
Capital Guaranteed 4.06%
International Shares 35.52%
International Sustainable Shares 44.8%
Cash 4.18
(these rates are net of fees + taxes)
(Balanced is the default option..made up of about 60% shares + 40% more defensive options.)
Looking at the period from 01/ 01/ 2011 to 30/06/2012..
when figures were effected by the GFC..the returns were..
Balanced 3.14 %
Capital Guaranteed 7.43 %
International Shares -1.08 %
International Sustainable Shares 2.6 %
Cash 6.8%
Whilst shares didn't do well over this period you would still be a mile infrom
had you left it there all along.
I think a lot of people moved the $ into the safer options around 2012..+
have been much worse off since.
Gets moe complicated, but just want to get some opinions. |
Replies:
Posted By: Bright Day
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 11:05am
|
It has been a good year for shares and superannuation portfolios; no doubt. But you have to take it in consideration with the last 5 years which have been negative or null. Not just last year. Your Share portfolio is only making up for ground it lost b/w 2006-2011. Plus Australian Superannuation schemes take out ridiculously high administration fees. They highest in the world. |
Posted By: Ecair Issoire
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 11:15am
|
from what i can see (again only with this 1 fund)
b/w around july 2006 to july 2008 was the worst of it..
around a 40% loss for international shares..
so you are right my first date range was not very meaningful..
i know it's complicated.
+ on fees...industry funds are known to charge much lower fees than private funds..
whether the product / service is better with a private fund, is debatable.
|
Posted By: ExceedAndExcel
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 11:17am
| Fees should be irrelevant. It's the final return that is all that matters. |
Posted By: Ecair Issoire
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 11:19am
|
yes..
+ the figures listed initially in the 1st post
are net of (after) fees + taxes..have been deducted already.
|
Posted By: ExceedAndExcel
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 11:25am
| Exactly. They give final returns so who cares what the fee is. I'll take a 20% net return with a 5% fee over a 5% net return with a 1% fee every day of the week. |
Posted By: Bright Day
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 11:28am
|
Yes, but during the 2005-2011 time. Returns were negative and Fees were 8-12%. Not a good look. Hence a lot of distrust with the industry. A monkey could run at those type of portfolio losses at that time. We were paying for expertise and getting none. |
Posted By: Ecair Issoire
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 11:31am
I dont think that's the case.
If you looked at figuers from 01/07/2007 to 30/06/2014 ..
comparing say property/cash to shares..i think shares would be well infront.
I'll try to find the figures or if anyone else can, that would be great.
|
Bright Day wrote:Posted By: ExceedAndExcel
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 11:41am
Which funds were charging 8-12% fees? Give us a link to this. I'll save you trouble. The answer is none. 
|
Posted By: Bright Day
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 11:56am
|
Mate, you can try and defend the industry as much as you like but in 2002, it was common practice. Now thank goodness the industry has bitten the bullet and realised that it isn't caviar sandwiches for lunch every day. |
Posted By: ExceedAndExcel
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 11:57am
| It was never common practice to charge 12% fees. If it was you'd be able to give up proof. |
Posted By: Bright Day
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 12:18pm
|
Look mate I was in the industry. I know what used to go on. I rode the halcyon days which we thought could never end. Record Stock market highs. Record highs out of work too. We worked hard but we played even harder. Someone had to pay for our fillet de Bouf and Coniac lunches. Our nightly visits to Goldfinger and our nose candy. Here is an article from 2001 about the fees paid then. Australians are paying up to three times more than they should for superannuation. Excessively high fees are seriously damaging their retirement balances and hurting taxpayers, who pay more for pensions when superannuation runs short. Reducing fees by half could save account holders $10 billion a year. It is the largest single opportunity for micro-economic reform in the Australian economy. Australians on average pay fees of 12 per cent on their superannuation account balances, more than three times the median OECD rate. On conservative assumptions that means a 50-year old Australian today will have his or her super balance reduced by almost $300,000 in fees (in today’s dollars) at retirement. A 30-year old will lose more than $650,000, or about a quarter of his or her total balance. Under a fairer fee structure, at least half that money could be saved. These high fees are not justified by high returns – Australian funds that charge the highest fees consistently deliver lower returns than other funds once their fees are taken out. Costs are too high because the system wrongly assumes that choice in the market will drive enough account holders to choose low-price funds, thereby forcing others to lower their fees. But this approach has not worked in Australia or anywhere in the world. Superannuation is inherently opaque and most people do not make an informed choice, instead paying into a default fund chosen by their employer. sure the industry has cleaned itself up somewhat. But it had to! |
Posted By: Tuft_it_Tees
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 12:24pm
| Question : If Jesus had invested $1 at 4% per annum compound, so as to be cashed-up for the Second Coming, how much would he now have to re-distribute to the faithful ? |
Posted By: ExceedAndExcel
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 12:28pm
How about giving a link to that article? 12% is rubbish and so is your claim that you worked in the industry. How do I know you never worked in the industry? Because I did previously and fees were NEVER anything like that level. Try again fool. |
Posted By: Bright Day
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 12:41pm
|
Look I'm not arguing with you mate. I lived the life. People were skimmed fees that they didn't even realise they were paying I know how it was funded. It was outrageous. It made the Wolf of Wall Street look like a tea party. We used to have hot and cold women coming into our rest rooms 24/7 while we played on the markets. The supply of coke was endless and the bonuses were so over the top, we felt like we were stealing. I got set up for a number of lifetimes just by using a little bit of insider knowledge on stock rises and falls. But that is the way you did things in those days. There was no accountability. There were no guidelines or governance. Greed for want of a better word; was GOOD! Fees reduced Supperannuation by $158 billion last year. So they are still too high imo. The competitive nature of the fees and charges is particularly significant given the smaller $ balances, relative to many other countries, held by many individuals in Australia – particularly in industry funds. Retail products offered on a group basis often have expenses around 8% of assets. Retail products offered on an individual basis can have fees as low as 8% of assets for large balances, but generally have expenses in excess of 6.5% with expenses of 8.5% or more for small retail products distributed by way of an adviser or other network. In addition, the complexity of some fee structures can make it difficult and costly for individuals to collect information on fees and to make comparisons. While financial planners can assist with considering available investment options and superannuation strategies, very often their own remuneration is one of the complicating factors in comparing fees and charges. Administrative and investment fees and charges are also of considerable interest to policy-makers because they can have a significant impact on eventual retirement income. Calculations prepared by one researcher have shown fees reducing eventual retirement savings by between under 10% to over 25%, depending on the fee level concerned. However, on the other hand there are some that argue that higher fees can be a reward for better performance in regard to investment earnings. But not in the early 2000s. We got the fees first then. And Joe Public was just a sucker to an industry he didn't really understand. Until the Crash of course. That changed everything. |
Posted By: Bright Day
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 12:48pm
Jesus gave all his money to Caesar. Bible > Luke > Chapter 20 > Verse 25 ◄ Luke 20:25 ► Parallel Verses New International Version He said to them, "Then give back to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's." New Living Translation "Well then," he said, "give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and give to God what belongs to God." English Standard Version He said to them, “Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” New American Standard Bible And He said to them, "Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." King James Bible And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's. Holman Christian Standard Bible "Well then," He told them, "give back to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's." International Standard Version So he told them, "Then give back to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." NET Bible So he said to them, "Then give to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." Aramaic Bible in Plain English Yeshua said to them, “Give therefore to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's.” GOD'S WORD® Translation He said to them, "Well, then give the emperor what belongs to the emperor, and give God what belongs to God." Jubilee Bible 2000 And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's and unto God the things which are God's. King James 2000 Bible And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things which are God's. American King James Version And he said to them, Render therefore to Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and to God the things which be God's. American Standard Version And he said unto them, Then render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's. Douay-Rheims Bible And he said to them: Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's: and to God the things that are God's. Darby Bible Translation And he said to them, Pay therefore what is Caesar's to Caesar, and what is God's to God. English Revised Version And he said unto them, Then render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's. Webster's Bible Translation And he said to them, Render therefore to Cesar the things which are Cesar's, and to God the things which are God's. Weymouth New Testament "Pay therefore," He replied, "what is Caesar's to Caesar--and what is God's to God." World English Bible He said to them, "Then give to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." Young's Literal Translation and he said to them, 'Give back, therefore, the things of Caesar to Caesar, and the things of God to God;' Parallel Commentaries Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary 20:20-26 Those who are most crafty in their designs against Christ and his gospel, cannot hide them. He did not give a direct answer, but reproved them for offering to impose upon him; and they could not fasten upon any thing wherewith to stir up either the governor or the people against him. The wisdom which is from above, will direct all who teach the way of God truly, to avoid the snares laid for them by wicked men; and will teach our duty to God, to our rulers, and to all men, so clearly, that opposers will have no evil to say of us. Pulpit Commentary Verse 25. - And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's. As regarded the immediate issues the Lord's answer was in the affirmative: "Yes, it is lawful under the present circumstances to pay this tribute." The Roman money current in the land, bearing the image and title of the Caesar, bore perpetual witness to the fact that the rule of Rome was established and acknowledged by the Jewish people and their rulers. It was a well-known and acknowledged saying, that "he whose coin is current is king of the land." So the great Jewish rabbi Maimonides, centuries after, wrote, "Ubi-cunque numisma regis alicujus obtinet, illic incolae regem istum pro Domino agnoscup cake." The tribute imposed by the recognized sovereign ought certainly to be paid as a just debt; nor would this payment at all interfere with the people's discharging their duties God-ward. The tithes, tribute to the temple, the offerings enjoined by the Law they revered, - these ancient witnesses to the Divine sovereignty in Israel might and ought still to be rendered, as well as the higher obligations to the invisible King, such as faith, love, and obedience. Tribute to the Caesar, then, the acknowledged sovereign, in no way interfered with tribute to God. What belonged to Caesar should be given to him, and what belonged to God ought to be rendered likewise to him. Godet, in a long and able note, adds that Jesus would teach the turbulent Jewish people that the way to regain their theocratic independence was not to violate the duty of submission to Caesar by a revolutionary shaking off of his yoke, but to return to the faithful fulfilment of all duties toward God, "To render to God what is God's was the way for the people of God to obtain a new David instead of Caesar as their Lord. To the Pharisees and Zealots, 'Render unto Caesar;' to the Herodians, 'Render unto God.'" Well caught the great Christian teachers their Master's thought here in all their teaching respecting an institution such as slavery, in their injunctions concerning rigid and unswerving loyalty to established authority. So St. Paul: "Be subject to the powers... not only from fear of punishment, but also for conscience' sake" (Romans 13:1 and 1 Timothy). Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible And he said unto them, render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's,.... The Arabic version renders it, "give to the king what is the king's"; the tribute that was due to him; since they were under his government, and were protected by him, and traded with his money; the currency of which among them was an acknowledgment of him as their sovereign: and unto God the things which be God's; which relate to his worship, honour, interest, and kingdom; See Gill on Matthew 22:21. Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary 25. things which be Cæsar's—Putting it in this general form, it was impossible for sedition itself to dispute it, and yet it dissolved the snare. and unto God—How much there is in this profound but to them startling addition to the maxim, and how incomparable is the whole for fulness, brevity, clearness, weight! |
Posted By: Tuft_it_Tees
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 12:52pm
| Answer to my question, "If Jesus had invested $1 at 4% per annum compound, so as to be cashed-up for the Second Coming, how much would he now have to re-distribute to the faithful ?" .........is, far more than the weight of the Earth in gold. Moral of the story is, the idea that even a seemingly modest annual compounding of a principal is sustainable, in perpetuity, is utterly wrong. |
Posted By: ExceedAndExcel
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 12:54pm
So you're not going to provide us with a link to the article then? Gee I wonder why! How about I do it for you? http://grattan.edu.au/publications/reports/post/super-sting-how-to-stop-australians-paying-too-much-for-superannuation/ Nice try deleting the decimal place between the 1 and the 2. Try again numpty!
|
Posted By: Bright Day
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 1:06pm
|
Mate, if you read the article properly you know that 12% was nothing in the late 90% and early b200s and you know what, it didn't matter then because people had just moved from a very bland basic cash product to the idea of shares in their portfolio and they didn't know. They didn't know how easy it was for us traders to move their money around so they were making 40% interest. Sure that was the top end in very risky portfolios but at the time you had the whole IT start up company buble so it was nothing for a company share price to rise from 1c a share to $5 A SHARE. And we all got rich and fat and met a number of very pretty women because of it. So if we slugged blokes at 12% then they didn't care because they were still getting more plus they thought it was some sort of magic trick. Some sort of OMG illusion like the Wizard of Oz when all it was related to a bit of inside knowledge. Mate, we used to go out to the strip clubs and sort nose candy with the regulators and also the blokes who were about to float their companies. How can you not get some insider trading. And no one cared. EVERYBODY was making money and the true Capitalistic system was working the way it should. Then the US stuffed it all up. People who didn't know what they were doing got into the industry. Blokes who had no experience and hadn't trained. I remember once, a bloke who I went to school with who failed year 10 and was a part time plumber told me he was getting into the industry as a financial advisor. That is the moment I know we had jumped the Shark. For sure. there were blokes who had no idea in the industry just pumping it up for all it was worth and like everything mankind has ever done; sooner or later it had to go down the gurgler. Still I made my fortune and had my fun while the going was good. Then there were 8 or so years of bleakness. But hopefully if we don't have tooo many wars; the share market is coming back and it will be halcyon days once again. Good luck to those investing. Cheers. |
Posted By: Bright Day
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 1:08pm
The whole point of the Christ metaphor; even if he himself never existed; is that God doesn't care about worldly things like money. He\It\Deity is all about being in the Now and Acceptance of what is! |
Posted By: ExceedAndExcel
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 1:08pm
|
It takes a certain type of imbecile to continue the same argument even after being comprehensively dispatched into the grandstand. Carry on numpty, your clueless rambling are great for a laugh!
|
Posted By: Tuft_it_Tees
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 1:13pm
| It was simply a way of illustrating the principle that ongoing, real, compounding, safe increases in wealth are unsustainable, a lesson that remains to be learned by the many. Nothing to do with religion or historical personalities. |
Posted By: Ecair Issoire
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 1:18pm
|
" Costs are too high because the system wrongly assumes that choice in the market will drive enough account holders to choose low-price funds, thereby forcing others to lower their fees. But this approach has not worked in Australia or anywhere in the world. Superannuation is inherently opaque and most people do not make an informed choice, instead paying into a default fund chosen by their employer." Good point..Bright day, I agree that most people know very little about their super...myself included
until i started working for a fund.a few years back.....their shoulkd be more education about
something that is so important, imo.
|
Posted By: Tuft_it_Tees
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 1:20pm
| fund management fees in Australia are high by international standards, but don't approach BD's 10% extravaganza. |
Posted By: Bright Day
Date Posted: 18 Jul 2014 at 1:31pm
|
It depends on the customer and Superannuation Funds do stagger fees based on the amount of service they provide at the top end of the market. Look I have seen blokes who are happy to pay anything. And the Managers thought they could get Joe Public over a barrel and smash him. It was disgusting the way that people were treated by Superannuation funds as far as fees are concerned. Écair Issoire, member interest in fees disclosed on member statements is heightened during times when investment earnings are low, and fees appear to be relatively high. In many cases concerns are further increased by the impact of contributions tax. In this regard, it needs to be noted that often the most significant charge made against a member’s account balance is the Commonwealth Government’s 15% tax on employer contributions to superannuation (with sometimes the 15% surcharge tax on top of that for high income earners and those who do not disclose a tax file number). Insurance premiums for death and disability cover also can be perceived, incorrectly, by some members who do not make an insurance claim as being an additional charge for no additional benefit. That said, for some individuals and for some superannuation products the level of administration and investment charges can be relatively high in comparison to fund earnings. Complaints started to come from guys like me in the superannuation sector itself, normally in the context of one fund or category of funds claiming to be much more cost competitive than other funds. Generally it is personal superannuation products distributed by forprofit financial institutions that are the target of such criticisms. For instance, a number of industry funds have published comparisons of their fees and charges with those of competing master trusts. The Australian Institute of Superannuation Trustees (AIST) also has made adverse comments on the relative level of charges of retail superannuation products. The prudential regulator for superannuation, the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) publishes quarterly statistics drawn from a joint APRA and Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) survey. In a consumer choice environment, the disclosure model for superannuation products must ensure comparability of information as well as basic understanding of the material provided. 2. The results of the comprehension testing indicate that a high degree of regulatory prescription is likely be necessary to achieve the twin aims of comprehension and comparability. 3. The development of an effective disclosure model as the basis for such regulation must be performance based and user friendly , involving an intensive process of one on one testing for comprehension and comparability; and development of terminology and format drawn from such a testing process. 4. If across the board prescription based on the principles outlined above is not acceptable, such prescription should at least apply to all funds wishing to attract superannuation guarantee contributions under a choice of fund regime. 5. An extensive consumer education program is required around each of the main themes or issues covered in the disclosure document, such as fees and charges, investment choices and performance, availability of insurance, and how to compare such information from different funds. 6. Wherever possible, information provided by fund advisory or tele-services should use the same terminology as required in the standard disclosure document. |
Posted By: Whale
Date Posted: 24 Jul 2014 at 4:27pm
|
Just had a look at my super balance. My industry fund made 12.6% last year, that will do me  ------------- Victor Orban 1.74 m, Michael Bloomberg 1.73 m, Emmanual Macron 1.77 m, George Soros 1.8 m |
Posted By: ExceedAndExcel
Date Posted: 24 Jul 2014 at 4:35pm
|
What happened to Bright Day? When I saw this thread pop up again I was hoping for more of his "12% fees" hilarity and copy & pasted material from other websites being passed off as his own work.
|
Posted By: Whale
Date Posted: 04 Aug 2014 at 10:19pm
|
just when you're feeling very pleased with yourself and counting your gains, BANG. the market tanks and your profit decreases by 50% in 2 days  ------------- Victor Orban 1.74 m, Michael Bloomberg 1.73 m, Emmanual Macron 1.77 m, George Soros 1.8 m |
Posted By: Whale
Date Posted: 14 Aug 2014 at 1:12pm
|
your super would have gone down a lot in the last week. recovered most of the losses in the last 2 days the stock market is crazy, I just don't get it, does anyone ? ------------- Victor Orban 1.74 m, Michael Bloomberg 1.73 m, Emmanual Macron 1.77 m, George Soros 1.8 m |
Posted By: James Bond Esq
Date Posted: 14 Aug 2014 at 1:21pm
| To be actively involved in Superannuation, it is not something you can assess on a day to day operating level. The highs and lows will take place but remember, we are still playing catch up over the last few years. It is the long haul, the 25 year odyssey that we need to rap ourselves in. That is what Superannuation is all about. The day to day nuances of the ups and downs, if you worry about those, you will go nuts. |
Posted By: James Bond Esq
Date Posted: 14 Aug 2014 at 1:23pm
Australia and Australian markets are slaves to overseas forces, some of these are in the backrooms of organisations taking profits willy nilly that we can't fully comprehend. There are controlling forces out there above and beyond the nuisances of day to day economic activity. |
Posted By: Whale
Date Posted: 16 Aug 2014 at 5:23pm
|
Even industry funds charge too much.In Chile where it is put to some sort of tender about .2% is charged compared to .9 % here http://www.businessinsider.com.au/a-new-study-has-found-a-staggering-gap-in-retirement-payouts-for-australians-in-retail-versus-industry-funds-2014-8" rel="nofollow - http://www.businessinsider.com.au/a-new-study-has-found-a-staggering-gap-in-retirement-payouts-for-australians-in-retail-versus-industry-funds-2014-8 ------------- Victor Orban 1.74 m, Michael Bloomberg 1.73 m, Emmanual Macron 1.77 m, George Soros 1.8 m |
Posted By: Ecair Issoire
Date Posted: 23 Dec 2014 at 8:44am
|
this financial year..the super fund i'm in -
the international shares investment option is up 14.15 %..
flying.
the international shares hedged option is only up 4.9% this finacial year...
hedged means that they somehow insure/protect against the aus$ rising..
the poor return compared to the "unhedged" option suggests that the aus$ falling
has been part of the reason that the int shares option has done so well..
from my 1st post in this thread i used the 01/01/2013 as a starting point for figures quoted..
since then the int shares option has returned..52.99% - (just under 2 years)..
I had my $ in that option for most of that time + chickened out in mid may this year + put it in
the property option..thinking that the good run has to end soon..
i wish i hadn't...as i've missed out on a bit over 12.5%..+ i don't think i can go back into it now.
Anyone have any thoughts on why the international shares investment option has done so well over the last 2 years + what might happen in the next couple of years?
|
Posted By: Whale
Date Posted: 23 Dec 2014 at 8:57am
|
Maybe recently diving resource prices have affected the Australian stockmarket, but yes it does seem international shares do better in general. I put some money in super and took the direct invest option, in other words I could buy the shares I liked. I wish I had just left the money in the default account and let the super fund invest it, they are much better than me  My fund made about 12% last year, very good when the interest rate on deposits is about 3.5% ------------- Victor Orban 1.74 m, Michael Bloomberg 1.73 m, Emmanual Macron 1.77 m, George Soros 1.8 m |
Posted By: ExceedAndExcel
Date Posted: 23 Dec 2014 at 9:00am
| The AUD has fallen around 20% against virtually every major currency in the last two years. That's a fair slice of your outperformance relative to the australian market right there. |
Posted By: James Bond Esq
Date Posted: 23 Dec 2014 at 9:27am
| Yes, any investments in international shares should have automatically increased by 20% without any organic growth in the shares. |
Posted By: Whale
Date Posted: 23 Dec 2014 at 9:31am
|
I don't think that is what he was referring to. I think he is talking about the % growth in o'seas markets, not the exchange benefits which would be magnificent too ------------- Victor Orban 1.74 m, Michael Bloomberg 1.73 m, Emmanual Macron 1.77 m, George Soros 1.8 m |
Posted By: Ecair Issoire
Date Posted: 23 Dec 2014 at 9:36am
|
i've been thinking about the direct stuff too..ie picking my own shares..addtional fees to have access to that option,,usually..+ restrictions/rules that wouldn't normally apply when trading outside of super..eg X % of your $ in any 1 share or Y% in shares total..no day trading, etc. seems more fun, watching your stock performance each day.. + with more potential for better returns..but as always with potential for better returns comes potential for bigger losses..
E+E . .any speculation as to what will happen to the A$ in the next year or 2?
|
Posted By: James Bond Esq
Date Posted: 23 Dec 2014 at 9:37am
Good luck Whale. I hope you keep killing it on the Super front. 
|
Posted By: ExceedAndExcel
Date Posted: 23 Dec 2014 at 9:40am
I would love to say the AUD will go back up as I have a 4-6 week trip planned. Sadly I think it may go down further but not too much hopefully. Perhaps to USD0.75. Thankfully the major expense of flights will be paid for using frequent flyer points! |
Posted By: Ecair Issoire
Date Posted: 23 Dec 2014 at 9:41am
|
i think E+E was referring to the exchange rate of the $A
- not the sharemarket o's ..he can ofcourse clarify/confirm that.
|
Posted By: James Bond Esq
Date Posted: 23 Dec 2014 at 9:44am
You are right. While interested rates in Australia are relatively high compared to the rest of the world; there is no way the Australian dollar can go up. |
Posted By: Whale
Date Posted: 23 Dec 2014 at 10:21am
My fund does not have additional fees for the direct invest option but there are % rules. It is certainly a wild ride, at my best I was + $11,500, at my worst a few days ago I assume I was down about $3000 , I was too scared to look At the moment I am up about $4200 , not counting dividends which of course are taxed at only 15% ------------- Victor Orban 1.74 m, Michael Bloomberg 1.73 m, Emmanual Macron 1.77 m, George Soros 1.8 m |
Posted By: Rosscoe
Date Posted: 23 Dec 2014 at 12:54pm
|
I trade regularly and follow the markets very closely using Fundamental & Technical Analysis. A high proportion of my analysis is "Technical" basing my strategies on where investors are dropping their hard-earned. The whole game is based on 2 major concepts:- 1. Confidence 2. Psychology The International Shares have performed very nicely thanks to improving economic data in the US. However, the Australian Stockmarket has performed sluggishly over the past 12 months although some of the small-mid caps, banks, Telstra etc have performed nicely! I hold no more than 5-6 companies at one time. I've recently sold TPG (ASX - TPM) for a very healthy profit. I'm currently holding Telstra, PACT (going very nicely and scope for future growth), Slater & Gordon + Corporate Travel Management (watching this one closely and maybe selling very soon and taking profits). Internationally, the US economy will continue to improve & at present there is no real rush pushing interest rates up. When they do eventually go up it will be a very gradual process. I have my money in an Exchange Trading Fund (ASX-WDIV). It is a Global Dividend Fund - The SPDR S&P Global Dividend Fund seeks to provide investment returns, before fees and other costs, that closely correspond to the performance of the S&P Global Dividend Aristocrats Index. I expect this ETF to grow very nicely over the next 12-18 months. It gives exposure to quality companies around the world including a sizeable % in The USA, Canada + UK (around 50% weightings). As for the OZ dollar - it will continue to fall & will be in the 70's before too much longer. Searching for & investing in companies that have assets in the USA & other emerging markets will be a player in the 12 months ahead. I currently have my eye on a few small-mid caps that appear to be quite cheap with the potential for solid growth. Again these companies need exposure outside of Australia. Some of the experts are calling the ASX-200 + All Ords to be nudging the 6000 mark by the end of 2015. If correct, very solid gains will be made however I'm not so sure these predictions will come to fruition. I believe we have some fundamental problems / issues here in OZ which is putting a negative on overall confidence. Targeting a few solid, well performed companies with overseas exposure mentioned previously will be my goal in 2015. ------------- Current Stable - Soul Star & Adivinar + Lady Vega |
Posted By: Whale
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2015 at 2:29pm
up $12,000 now but not spending it yet, anything can happen and does on the stock market ------------- Victor Orban 1.74 m, Michael Bloomberg 1.73 m, Emmanual Macron 1.77 m, George Soros 1.8 m |
Posted By: ExceedAndExcel
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2015 at 2:45pm
|
What a great thread this was! Poor old JBE getting hammered as usual under his former alias. Hilarious stuff!
|
Posted By: saintly96
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2015 at 2:49pm
|
About 15 years ago the head of anaesthetics at my hospital was telling me that superannuation was a big con. He told me to get out and put the money away myself. I halved my own contribution (down to 4.5%), and the rest I just kept putting away each fortnight in a savings account. It is now in a high interest savings account and the balance is way more than I could have ever hoped for, and it is certainly making my super look quite thin. I can use this money for whatever I like, and whenever I like. I don't have to wait for retirement, which was the plan. However, with my daughter starting Uni next year, I might just use some of it to buy a house close to her Uni of choice instead. |
Posted By: Ecair Issoire
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2015 at 2:52pm
|
are you self employed saintly?
|
Posted By: saintly96
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2015 at 3:01pm
No. |
Posted By: ExceedAndExcel
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2015 at 3:05pm
| Likely that a significant reason for the difference is timing Saintly. Australian shares make up a significant percentage of most default funds asset allocation and the ASX200 is still close to 30% lower than what it was 7 years ago. |
Posted By: Ecair Issoire
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2015 at 3:06pm
|
i ask because an employer has to pay the SG (super guarantee)
currently 9.5% of your gross income into a super fund..
if you are self employed I believe you are supposed to do the same thing, however it's
not regulated...in the sense that nobody dobs themselves in for not paying
what they are legally obliged to...so self employed people
can effectively pay what they like into super.
Also, I am surprised that you've done a lot better in your bank account compared to the super
- are you in an industry fund?
|
Posted By: saintly96
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2015 at 3:14pm
When I say it has done better, it hasn't actually got as much in it as my super fund (I have been in my fund for a long time), but the amount in my savings has grown more than quickly over the last few years (especially as it is in high interest long term deposit), compared to the super, which over the last few years (especially during the GFC), went poorly in contrast. I like the fact that I am still contributing 4.5% to my super, and the rest (of what I would have contributed) goes straight into a separate savings account. I feel I have the best of both worlds. |
Posted By: Ecair Issoire
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2015 at 3:15pm
|
so your employer is not allowed to pay your super into your bank account..
(to my understanding)..unless it's part of a self managed super fund (smsf).
|
Posted By: Ecair Issoire
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2015 at 3:18pm
|
I'm confused...when you say "i'm contributing" do you mean
over and above the SG that the employer pays for you?
|
Posted By: saintly96
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2015 at 3:22pm
I pay the 4.5% into my super fund, my employer pays 10%. The money that would otherwise have gone straight into my super fund (which now goes into my bank), I put in a separate savings account, and have done for about 15 years. |
Posted By: Ecair Issoire
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2015 at 3:24pm
Ok, cheers  .
|
Posted By: Whale
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2015 at 3:35pm
I find that puzzling, any half decent super fund is able to beat bank deposits ------------- Victor Orban 1.74 m, Michael Bloomberg 1.73 m, Emmanual Macron 1.77 m, George Soros 1.8 m |
Posted By: saintly96
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2015 at 3:40pm
In the last few years, my savings, has climbed quicker than the amount in my super fund. I have been in the super fund for many many years, so the balance in there is much higher, but it certainly hasn't grown as quickly in the last 5 or so years as the high interest savings account. |
Posted By: Whale
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2015 at 3:45pm
what is high interest these days 3.5%  good for mortgagees bad for people who rely on their savings the direct investment proportion of my super fund has made me 9.5% in just over 6 months ------------- Victor Orban 1.74 m, Michael Bloomberg 1.73 m, Emmanual Macron 1.77 m, George Soros 1.8 m |
Posted By: ExceedAndExcel
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2015 at 3:47pm
| Are you paying tax on the savings account? Must remember the 3.5% they offer is pre-tax. Super returns are post-tax. |
Posted By: saintly96
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2015 at 3:58pm
I am not a financial expert (as our financial planner keeps telling us), I am into health care, but, during the GFC, did your super fund make any gains for you, mine certainly did not? PS, I have stated, I like the fact that I can access this money at anytime, for whatever reason I feel necessary (although I haven't as yet). |
Posted By: Whale
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2015 at 4:01pm
|
yes the GFC was a big setback for funds. to tell you the truth I had a relatively small amount in there at that stage and did not take any notice of the quarterly statements I received. my share portfolio went down a lot ,of course ------------- Victor Orban 1.74 m, Michael Bloomberg 1.73 m, Emmanual Macron 1.77 m, George Soros 1.8 m |
Posted By: Rosscoe
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2015 at 5:32pm
|
Well, with today's 0.25% rate cut and a distinct possibility of another one as early as next month, the equities now appear to be even more attractive. The AUD is now moving down towards the mid 70s. I bought one more company since Dec 2014. Now 7 in my portfolio ( selling one very soon) ... RESMED was bought in January at $7 .. ( a company that has exposure in the USA - sleep apnoea products), has risen beautifully to $8.10 today. A very well managed company that will only grow with a shrinking AUD. A small dividend was thrown in as well. Telstra continues to grow - the yield investors have stepped in to take advantage of dividends with TLS half-yearly report on 12th Feb. Ex-Dividends to be announced shortly afterwards on 24th Feb. I have my eye on another company or two but am waiting for opportunistic buying when the market corrects. The ASX200 + All Ords could now well hit the 6000 mark predicted by some leading economists, a figure I thought was out of reach at the beginning of the year. The ASX200 hit the 5707 mark today but expect volatility to bring the market back again shortly. Amazingly the ASX200 + All Ords have now risen for the last 9 days. We hit a new high today that has not been seen since June 2008. Going forward, the equities is where you need to be for the short-mid term. ------------- Current Stable - Soul Star & Adivinar + Lady Vega |
Posted By: Browndog
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2015 at 5:52pm
|
I think at least 1 more cut, probably 2 has been priced in today ------------- |
Posted By: Whale
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2015 at 6:04pm
|
13% profit in less than 7 moths on the direct investment portion of my super fund, beats term deposits
------------- Victor Orban 1.74 m, Michael Bloomberg 1.73 m, Emmanual Macron 1.77 m, George Soros 1.8 m |
Posted By: Ecair Issoire
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2015 at 6:11pm
|
well done rosscoe + whale. i got out of the "international shares' investment option on the 8th may last year..+ into the "property" option since then: int shares up 22.6% + property up only 7.7% ouch.. i cut + ran too soon..(had done very well over the previous 2 yrs ish). |
Posted By: Whale
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2015 at 6:16pm
|
shares are volatile, no guarantees my profit will be there in a few months. no harm in taking a profit and 7.7&% in 9 months is alright too,especially with tax advantages in super fund ------------- Victor Orban 1.74 m, Michael Bloomberg 1.73 m, Emmanual Macron 1.77 m, George Soros 1.8 m |
Posted By: Ecair Issoire
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2015 at 6:28pm
|
** i'm referringto my super + the managed options rather than direct where i pick the shares myself** ...still haven't got the b*lls to do that. been watching a fair few shares + investment shows lately to try + get a basic understanding of what i'd be doing.. + you are right whale, i shouldn't complain. nothing wrong with 7.7% over 9 months as the safe option. i will get around to the direct stuff with my super eventually. |
Posted By: maccamax
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2015 at 8:27pm
| I'm not into shares but surely OIL will start to rise shortly. |
Posted By: Browndog
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2015 at 9:04pm
|
Don't hold your breath waiting maxie. Today's rate cut was in significant part due the falling oil price pushing inflation down, and the market pricing in a couple more cuts suggests things aren't expected to change anytime soon That and this hopeless govt ------------- |
Posted By: 3blindmice
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2015 at 9:24pm
|
As Warren Buffet recently reiterated you can do far worse than invest in a low-cost S&P 500 index fund (he recommended Vanguard iirc). From the very little I read about them last month the better ones consistently outdo many(most?) fund managers, which makes you wonder why Oz super funds use their overpriced services at all. I'm also with Australian Super and I can't recall seeing Index Funds as an investment choice. Must ask. |
Posted By: Rosscoe
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2015 at 9:37pm
|
This might be worth some consideration! I wrote about this ETF back in December & quoted … "Internationally, the US economy will continue to improve & at present there is no real rush pushing interest rates up. When they do eventually go up it will be a very gradual process. I have my money in an Exchange Trading Fund (ASX-WDIV). It is a Global Dividend Fund - The SPDR S&P Global Dividend Fund seeks to provide investment returns, before fees and other costs, that closely correspond to the performance of the S&P Global Dividend Aristocrats Index." "I expect this ETF to grow very nicely over the next 12-18 months. It gives exposure to quality companies around the world including a sizeable % in The USA, Canada + UK (around 50% weightings)." I've seen this ETF grow from $17 to $19.15 in a little over a month and a bit! With Quantitative Easing getting a kickstart in Europe as of March, expect this ETF to grow very nicely over the remainder of the year. ------------- Current Stable - Soul Star & Adivinar + Lady Vega |
Posted By: whitt0
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2015 at 9:54pm
|
Asian Equities unhedged. That is the way to play it for lil bit longer. You wont get me near a simplistic ETF that creates its own index to replicate. Better off with a high quality manager than a factor based strategy. As for global dividends, u r better off with Aus Eq income where you can get 4.5 cash yield + franking + higher income on a rotational strategy = 8-9%. |
Posted By: Ecair Issoire
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2015 at 9:54pm
|
they offer ETF's (exchange traded funds) within member direct http://www.australiansuper.com/campaigns/member-direct-guide.aspx which are not the same as index funds..but similar i think.. i don't know enough to explain the differences. |
Posted By: Ecair Issoire
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2015 at 9:56pm
| the previous post was kinda in reply to 3blindmice. |
Posted By: whitt0
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2015 at 9:57pm
The Buff was mainly referring to large Cap US equities where there is a fair argument to index (crowded market, little insight). Australian Equities is one of the best markets to seek an active manager. The avg active manager has outperformed the index by 150-200bps over the medium to long term. Note - they should be called sub index funds. Take out their fees & they don't replicate the index.
|
Posted By: whitt0
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2015 at 9:59pm
EI - they can be very similar. It depends what they are trying to achieve. If they are going to replicate an index like the ASX200 they will state it. If not, they may make up their own index!
|
Posted By: Ecair Issoire
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2015 at 10:05pm
|
thanks whitt0 there sure is oodles to learn. |
Posted By: whitt0
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2015 at 10:10pm
| I am not a fan of ETFs broadly but understand that it is a cheap simplistic way to get exposure to the share market. That suits some people. |
Posted By: Rosscoe
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2015 at 10:16pm
Ha? Have you done your mathematics Whitt0??? ------------- Current Stable - Soul Star & Adivinar + Lady Vega |
Posted By: whitt0
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2015 at 10:24pm
|
Rotational strategy gives u close to double the franking as well as an extra 1-2% income Roscoe 4.5% cash yield 2.5% -3% franking 2% approx extra income. Rotate through dividend periods (but not all) by avoiding dividend traps to boost after tax income. Don't rotate through all of them & hold the like of Telstra for longer if needed.
|
Posted By: Rosscoe
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2015 at 10:27pm
|
It totally depends on the companies you are buying into - throwing those figures around is absurd! ------------- Current Stable - Soul Star & Adivinar + Lady Vega |
Posted By: whitt0
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2015 at 10:33pm
|
Not absurd Rosscoe - suggest you do research. If your happy with 3.5% income from global dividends with the potential that you lose income because they have hedged on capital account - go for it. Of course it depends on the stocks, but you are not going to but low income stocks if u want income. Just 1 example & I can find more - Plato Aus Share Income Fund = 9.4% income last year. Also add in Merlon etc.
|
Posted By: Rosscoe
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2015 at 10:36pm
|
I suggest you do some more research! You are being very selective with your statements with little substance. ------------- Current Stable - Soul Star & Adivinar + Lady Vega |
Posted By: whitt0
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2015 at 10:41pm
|
How much more substance do you want. Global Equity income strategies average close to 3.5% income per annum due to low payout ratios. The firms are not incentivised to pay income. In Aus, totally the opposite. We have higher pay out ratios & a huge incentive via franking credits. I am not being selective. The Australian equity index will give you a cash yield of 4.5% + approx 1.5% of franking = 6% income. Focused and targeted fund managers can achieve a lot more than that. Your call on Telestra has been a good one. Inc franking, over the last few years you would have achieved close to double digit income including franking. I am more than happy to be a generalist or talk specific sectors. Either way, I am still long asian equities unhedged. your call on o'seas earnings is also a good one!
|
Posted By: Rosscoe
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2015 at 10:52pm
|
Go for it with the Asian equities unhedged (you are more game than I am for venturing into this one) and best of luck with your call! Telstra was a good call and yes so was WDIV global Equites Fund. Telstra is a growth stock - wouldn't you agree? ------------- Current Stable - Soul Star & Adivinar + Lady Vega |
Posted By: Rosscoe
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2015 at 8:04am
|
It depends very much on how you want to play the game with equities. I am searching companies that hopefully will achieve significant growth, if they throw in a healthy dividend as well, a bonus .. (that's the icing on the cake!) Having checked my portfolio this morning the following results have been achieved:- Telestra (bought in October 2014, up over 22%). Very much a growth stock & performing beautifully!!! WDIV Global Equities (bought Dec 2014, up over 11.5% with still plenty of growth left over 2015 period with QE just about to commence in Europe & the USA still kicking goals. This will have a rebound effect on other global economies) Slater & Gordon (bought August 2014, up over 10% - a company that has broken into the UK and appears to have lovely growth potential in front of them) Resmed (bought January 2015, up over 12% since buying them). Outstanding!!! The other companies (Corporate Travel Management & QANTAS with a small hold on TPG - having sold most of the company last year with unbelievable double digit growth), have made positive growth. Some nearing double digit growth. The next call of mine will be when to exit some of the companies I'm holding to take profits. Technical Analysis will point me in the right direction. Following the trend lines will make that call for me in the not so distant future …. The Dow Jones this morning is currently up over 300 points at present which points to another great day on our market. This will be the 10th straight day we have made gains here. Meanwhile, expect the AUD to drop further in the short term. As mentioned previously, selective companies with O/S exposure are likely to be the big winners as well as yield producing stocks like the Banks & Telstra. Onwards & upwards although I am of the opinion a correction in the market is not that far away …. ------------- Current Stable - Soul Star & Adivinar + Lady Vega |
Posted By: Whale
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2015 at 2:49pm
|
stockmarket has gone crazy and there will be a correction. I am in for the long run though however I have presently made 15% on direct investment in less than 7 months plus tax benefits in super fund. better than 15% annually in real estate Macca  , not geared though------------- Victor Orban 1.74 m, Michael Bloomberg 1.73 m, Emmanual Macron 1.77 m, George Soros 1.8 m |
Posted By: Whale
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2015 at 2:19pm
|
If you have your money in Australian shares you are doing much better than international shares so far this year While the US market rallied 11 per cent last year, it is slightly negative for 2015; by contrast, our market only rose 1.2 per cent last year but has jumped 6 per cent since the start of the year. According to Bloomberg data, the ASX200 has been the best world performer out of a group of 93 indices since January 20, in local currency terms. http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2015/2/6/markets/why-sharemarket-frenzy-could-fizzle" rel="nofollow - http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2015/2/6/markets/why-sharemarket-frenzy-could-fizzle ------------- Victor Orban 1.74 m, Michael Bloomberg 1.73 m, Emmanual Macron 1.77 m, George Soros 1.8 m |
Posted By: James Bond Esq
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2015 at 2:23pm
| Splash on effect. The US market is ahead of the Aussie Market. We will follow the US lead and slow down now. |
Posted By: Rosscoe
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2015 at 3:54pm
Correct!! I've added a few more stocks into my portfolio a few weeks back to take advantage of the upward swing. I recently sold Telstra and took fantastic profits. Resmed + Slater & Gordon have gone berserk, as have all of the others that I'm holding. All very much in the positive & (very healthy double digit gains)! Gains on the ASX this year have been extraordinary - quite amazing in fact!! I've bought more QANTAS and recently bought Retail Food Group who are expanding some of their franchises (Gloria Jean's Coffees and It's A Grind Brand Systems into the People's Republic of China). A longer term hold with this one but has plenty of growth in front of it …. I'd say nearly all sectors have done well today (exception being some of the commodities - which I refuse to go near!) The ASX200 is well up over 2%…. a magnificent rally! With interest rates sliding, the equities is the only place to be in!! People are now realising this after years of sitting on the sidelines post GFC! The cash is finally starting to flood into the equities … Expect very strong returns in the short-mid term. I'm unloading even more cash now to take advantage of these magnificent returns, upon careful selection of companies. Reporting season is adding plenty of spice & confidence to investors as well as improving global conditions & very low interest rates - with more to come! ------------- Current Stable - Soul Star & Adivinar + Lady Vega |
Posted By: Whale
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2015 at 3:57pm
|
and there is more overseas investment as the weaker AUD makes the shares very appealing
------------- Victor Orban 1.74 m, Michael Bloomberg 1.73 m, Emmanual Macron 1.77 m, George Soros 1.8 m |
Posted By: Rosscoe
Date Posted: 13 Feb 2015 at 3:58pm
|
Spot on ... ------------- Current Stable - Soul Star & Adivinar + Lady Vega |
Posted By: Rosscoe
Date Posted: 26 Feb 2015 at 11:47am
|
The Reporting of all the companies I hold has now been completed with Qantas & Retail Food Group demonstrating outstanding recent results & this has reflected in the share prices heading north dramatically over the past few days ... Retail Food Group have risen 20% since buying them only a short while back. (I believe this company is a long term proposition) Qantas exceeding expectations & general market consensus today. (nudging a 20% gain for me as well) ... more a short term proposition. The ASX200 / All Ords continues to close in on the 6000 mark & may well achieve this sooner rather than later. I'd say some form of a correction has to occur shortly however I'm holding all stocks in the short/mid term as the prediction of the further interest rate cuts will have a major spinoff and add more fuel for further equity growth ... ------------- Current Stable - Soul Star & Adivinar + Lady Vega |
Posted By: Ecair Issoire
Date Posted: 09 Mar 2015 at 8:49am
|
this is old news for anyone who knows stuff.
the big 3 banks: cba, nab + westpac have (factoring in dividends)
have virtually doubled over the last 3 years.
not bad for what's generally considered very safe stocks.
|
Posted By: Whale
Date Posted: 09 Mar 2015 at 9:02am
|
is the market due for a correction. the current bull run is 72 months, the average since 1937 is 55 months. time to take profits ? |
Posted By: Ecair Issoire
Date Posted: 09 Mar 2015 at 9:18am
|
i know f all whale -
i'm going to start the trading thing through my super..but along the lines
of your post, i'm think this would generally be a bad time to get involved.
|
Posted By: Ecair Issoire
Date Posted: 09 Mar 2015 at 9:32am
|
bear in mind i was thinking similar when i pulled out of
the int shares option...about 9 months ago
(atleast 9 months too early)..
looking forward to opinions of the more knowledgeable
|
Posted By: Whale
Date Posted: 09 Mar 2015 at 9:37am
|
I know as little as you Ecair. I simply saw a headline in the financial revue giving those stats. rosscoe is the man who seems to be right into the stock market |
Posted By: Ecair Issoire
Date Posted: 10 Mar 2015 at 8:10am
|
I work in superannuation..
+ it's really common for people to do the opposite of what they should.
They hear from every man on the st that shares are going cr*p so they move their $ into
something safe (cash for example)..so getting out when the prices are low..
then later they hear from every man on the st that shares are going good, then they
move their $ back into shares ie, buying high.
it's all cyclical: the idea is to go into shares when they have been cr*p for a while
+ to get out when they have been going good for a while..pretty basic principle
but many people don't understand it + have missed out on heaps in the super
for that reason, imo.
|