Diversify, buy no-load mutual funds with low costs, index funds etc. Dollar cost average in gradually over time. Good luck. This may be the last great buying opportunity in my age group's lifespan. (As long as we get out before Medicare and Social Security go belly up).
Tech stocks go wild wrote:
I am stunned I lost all my money since I was so well diversified. I invested in at least 10 different investment companies.
I take it this is not really true, but you are just showing off your paraprosdokian wit?
Flagpole wrote:
Yes get in, and STAY in. You shouldn't have left.
This has got to be one of the most ridiculous statements ever made, not just on LetsRun, but in all of humanity. What you're suggesting is that this person would be better off having 75-80% of the money they have now. This person, through sheer luck or foresight or whatever made a tremendously smart move by getting their money out before the market tanked. In general, I don't call anyone stupid but to suggest that this person would be better off with 75 cents on every dollar they now have is a galactically stupid statement.
Given what I know now, I would love the chance to go back just to last January and move my retirement savings from the TEN different diviersified funds that I have, into bonds. For every $100,000 I had then, I'd have $101,000 now, plus the additional deposits I (and my company) have made this year. Instead, I have $78,000 out of every $100k. Am I taking my money out now? No. I'm still shoveling money into those same funds as fast as I can, believing that they will eventually turn around and prosper. And I'll continue doing that for 15+ more years before I start moving into more conservative investments. But if you could start with $75 or $100, which would you choose?
I'm in a somewhat different situation. I am a few years out of school, I've got a good amount of money lying around in savings, and have decided to "risk it" and add some high risk stuff to my investment. Ive got a good job that is in no danger, no dependents and willing to risk. I've got a small portfolio of fairly stable companies, a 401k (which is not doing great, but not bad either) but really want to roll the dice for a year on some high risk stuff. (I would say my risk tolerance is pretty high and could buy into something and not look at it for six months).
Obviously I'm gonna talk to my portfolio manager, but anyone have any securities on sale they'd buy into if they had a couple grand to throw around?
freethee wrote:
Ive got a good job that is in no danger...
Famous last words....
malmo wrote:
Tech stocks go wild wrote:I am stunned I lost all my money since I was so well diversified. I invested in at least 10 different investment companies.
I take it this is not really true, but you are just showing off your paraprosdokian wit?
That line was rampant after the tech bust. I just changed the "tech company" to "investment company". In a few years you will be able to change it to the latest big bust. I"m not smart enough to come up with that myself, so I had to go Kid Suck and leech off of someone elses ingenuity.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwIGZLjugKAmalmo wrote:your paraprosdokian wit?
Thanks, I learned something new today.
A paraprosdokian (from Greek "παρα-", meaning "beyond" and "προσδοκία", meaning "expectation") is a figure of speech in which the latter part of a sentence or phrase is surprising or unexpected in a way that causes the reader or listener to reframe the first part. It is frequently used for humorous or dramatic effect, sometimes producing an anticlimax. For this reason, it is extremely popular among comedians and satirists.
hey, thanks to everybody for the thoughts. it's crazy out there, and i've decided to hold off for another week or 2..... i think it will get worse before the election, and then slightly better.... but what the hell do i know? that's my guess, but i will be putting in before the end of october, that's for sure.
here's what i've decided to do (i've decided that vanguard is the best bet)
5k in a roth 401k
10k in VBMFX (vanguard's bond fund)
10k in VGTSX (international)
12,500k in NAESX (small cap)
12,500k in VFINX (500 fund)
20k in VTTHX (their 2035 adjusted retirment fund)
the remaining 15k i'll keep in a money market account.... i figure it's good to have 6 months cash cushion, in case something drastic happens and i lose my job or something. thankfully, i don't have any debt or a mortgage, so i don't have to worry there.
thoughts? does this seem like a reasonable diversification?
thanks!
Put your money in gold until things clear up, which will be a while. Stay out of the market at the moment, you are only going to lose more money in the coming months. In the last year the market has dropped over a third. It's not quite done yet.
When it does go up again (and it should) don't try to guess at particular stocks. Tune into CNBC and when you see all the folks looking really happy you sell again and invest in gold because that's when it'll drop again.
DO NOT BUY ANYTHING NOW 'cept gold and the like.
ready to take the plunge wrote:
here's what i've decided to do (i've decided that vanguard is the best bet)
5k in a roth 401k
10k in VBMFX (vanguard's bond fund)
10k in VGTSX (international)
12,500k in NAESX (small cap)
12,500k in VFINX (500 fund)
20k in VTTHX (their 2035 adjusted retirment fund)
thoughts? does this seem like a reasonable diversification?
STAY OUT OF THE INTERNATIONAL FUND. When the US catches cold, Asia gets pneumonia.
In the Roth IRA, purchase 1 unit of BRK.B, leave the rest in cash, or purchase $1000 in a 12 month CD.
another athiest wrote:
Flagpole wrote:Yes get in, and STAY in. You shouldn't have left.
This has got to be one of the most ridiculous statements ever made, not just on LetsRun, but in all of humanity. What you're suggesting is that this person would be better off having 75-80% of the money they have now. This person, through sheer luck or foresight or whatever made a tremendously smart move by getting their money out before the market tanked. In general, I don't call anyone stupid but to suggest that this person would be better off with 75 cents on every dollar they now have is a galactically stupid statement.
Given what I know now, I would love the chance to go back just to last January and move my retirement savings from the TEN different diviersified funds that I have, into bonds. For every $100,000 I had then, I'd have $101,000 now, plus the additional deposits I (and my company) have made this year. Instead, I have $78,000 out of every $100k. Am I taking my money out now? No. I'm still shoveling money into those same funds as fast as I can, believing that they will eventually turn around and prosper. And I'll continue doing that for 15+ more years before I start moving into more conservative investments. But if you could start with $75 or $100, which would you choose?
It's not a stupid statement brother. You said it right -- he got lucky with the timing. We're not talking what would have been the best thing to do in hindsight...we're talking about what a person should do on an ongoing basis, and that is to NEVER try to time a market. So, when I tell him that he never should have left the market, I mean just that. Sheer LUCK that he did it at a good time. The stats are against him in trying to do it again. AND, what do most people do with the extra money when out of the market? MOST just spend it. That's a bad idea. All told, since I've put money in the whole time over the last year, when it does go back up, I will reap the benefits. It is smarter to have been putting money in the market in 2008 than it was in the first half of 2007 (which was a GREAT market then -- BOOMING up to 14,000 DOW). I've been doing this for a long time, and everytime there's a bad market I see people get out of it, and then they get back in after the momentum has already switched up again, so it's too late to fully capitalize. I had a couple people say to me in 2003 (when my investments made 43%) that I was lucky that I didn't take my money out during the DOT COM bubble burst. Wasn't luck. They took money out foolishly and lost. I kept it in and gained big time. The same will happen again when this crisis is over. Yes, I know it's different this time. It's always different. So it takes a little longer to recover. Fine by me. Just more time to accumulate stocks that will grow over time.
Flagpole wrote:
We're not talking what would have been the best thing to do in hindsight ...
What part of "You shouldn't have left" doesn't address hindsight ? So YES, WE ARE. Don't worry, the people on this board who think you're an arrogant blowhard won't (can't) think any worse of you just because you won't (can't) admit your statement was the dumbest thing since Miss Teen South Carolina opened her pie hole. Try to spin it however you like, it doesn't change the fact that the OP was incredibly fortunate to get out when they did. I'll make the best of what I have, but I'd love to have been that fortunate.
malmo wrote:
STAY OUT OF THE INTERNATIONAL FUND. When the US catches cold, Asia gets pneumonia.
In the Roth IRA, purchase 1 unit of BRK.B, leave the rest in cash, or purchase $1000 in a 12 month CD.
good call on the international fund malmo. thanks. i think it's still a good one to look at, but maybe 6-12 months down the road, eh?
anyone else?
another athiest wrote:
Flagpole wrote:We're not talking what would have been the best thing to do in hindsight ...
What part of "You shouldn't have left" doesn't address hindsight ? So YES, WE ARE. Don't worry, the people on this board who think you're an arrogant blowhard won't (can't) think any worse of you just because you won't (can't) admit your statement was the dumbest thing since Miss Teen South Carolina opened her pie hole. Try to spin it however you like, it doesn't change the fact that the OP was incredibly fortunate to get out when they did. I'll make the best of what I have, but I'd love to have been that fortunate.
Well brother, I'M not talking about what would have been best to do in hindsight. THAT'S ridiculous. Hell, if we're doing that, then I wish I would have sold everything I own and dumped it into tech stocks prior to 2002 and then right before the bust taken it all out and put it in bonds and then right before the bull market beginning in 2003 put it all back in stocks until October 2007 and then taken it all out and back into bonds since then. See how ridiculous that is? People who jump in and out of the market on average do worse than those who stay in. Jumpers get out too late and get back in too late so that they really aren't maximizing what they hoped they would be.
The OP may have been fortunate, but it was still a silly idea, one that will bite them big time in the future if they try it again, and even in this case, they will miss the exact right time to get back in. With the wild swings the market has seen, you never know when over the course of a week that the market will go up 1,200 points. Dude, I always admit when I'm wrong -- just not wrong here.
Case in point. I said at the beginning of the football season that the Buckeyes had perhaps the best team on paper. I now know that not to be true -- either on paper or on the field -- even if they make the title game again (which they could), they probably aren't one of the top two teams in the country (though if they make it, since I believe in just rewards, I will say they are then as I will say any two teams are if they are in that title game).
Flagpole wrote:
Well brother, I'M not talking about what would have been best to do in hindsight.
Dude, I always admit when I'm wrong -- just not wrong here.
I was SOOO ready to just drop this and move on, but your last statement that I quoted just won't let me ... I've seen you become a kinder, gentler Flagpole recently, but that last statement reaffirms the notion that you still act like an arrogant SOB.
One last time so (hopefully) you'll get it ...
YOU told the OP they shouldn't have left when did. If that's not hindsight, I don't know what it is. *I* didn't write it, YOU did. Regardless of whether or not they (you, I, whoever, whomever(?)) can time the market in the FUTURE, getting out earlier this year was (as we now know) a GREAT idea.
I agree, who knows when the best time to get back in will be ? BUT, those of us who have stayed in (and are still staying in) have 70 cents (or less) of every dollar we had back then. The OP has all 100 pennies from every dollar they had. Is now the BEST time to get in? Maybe, maybe not. As long as the OP buys in at a price lower than when they left, they are still better off.
It won't matter if you admit you were wrong or not, we all know.
another athiest wrote:
I was SOOO ready to just drop this and move on, but your last statement that I quoted just won't let me ... I've seen you become a kinder, gentler Flagpole recently, but that last statement reaffirms the notion that you still act like an arrogant SOB.
One last time so (hopefully) you'll get it ...
YOU told the OP they shouldn't have left when did. If that's not hindsight, I don't know what it is. *I* didn't write it, YOU did. Regardless of whether or not they (you, I, whoever, whomever(?)) can time the market in the FUTURE, getting out earlier this year was (as we now know) a GREAT idea.
I agree, who knows when the best time to get back in will be ? BUT, those of us who have stayed in (and are still staying in) have 70 cents (or less) of every dollar we had back then. The OP has all 100 pennies from every dollar they had. Is now the BEST time to get in? Maybe, maybe not. As long as the OP buys in at a price lower than when they left, they are still better off.
It won't matter if you admit you were wrong or not, we all know.
Dude, what you aren't grasping is that what I said isn't what you think I said. Now that I've further explained to you what I said and you still go back to your initial assumption, that shows pigheadedness on your part. Good for him that he got out when he did, but one more time, he should not have taken that money out. Why? Because he didn't KNOW the market would turn like it did. That's my point. He's been lucky this one time which will unfortunately make him believe he can do it again, and he won't be able to. AND, really the only way he will have benefited is if he saved all that money that he took out and he gets it back in the market before it goes way up again and then also puts in anything he would have put in during the time he was not investing. Doubtful on both counts -- statistics say so.
1988 -- began a 12-year bull market. When in there would have been a good time to get out? After 5 strong years? How about 6? 8? Then in 2002, a 5-year bull market began. Would this one be as long as the one that began in 1988? Next to impossible to predict.
I stand by my initial comment. He shouldn't have taken his money out because he will do so again in the future when his gut tells him to, and that's a bad way to go.
Flagpole wrote:
Dude, what you aren't grasping is that what I said isn't what you think I said. Now that I've further explained to you what I said and you still go back to your initial assumption, that shows pigheadedness on your part. Good for him that he got out when he did, but one more time, he should not have taken that money out. Why? Because he didn't KNOW the market would turn like it did. That's my point. He's been lucky this one time which will unfortunately make him believe he can do it again, and he won't be able to. AND, really the only way he will have benefited is if he saved all that money that he took out and he gets it back in the market before it goes way up again and then also puts in anything he would have put in during the time he was not investing. Doubtful on both counts -- statistics say so.
1988 -- began a 12-year bull market. When in there would have been a good time to get out? After 5 strong years? How about 6? 8? Then in 2002, a 5-year bull market began. Would this one be as long as the one that began in 1988? Next to impossible to predict.
I stand by my initial comment. He shouldn't have taken his money out because he will do so again in the future when his gut tells him to, and that's a bad way to go.
i'll agree that i shouldn't have panicked..... it's the first time i've done that since i started investing (1991). not even during the dot com burst did i sell, but this time around, i felt like we were headed for trouble, and i was concurrently planning to buy some land, so i cashed out a chunk so i'd have a good down payment. while i was down from the 14k peak, i still made a huge chunk on what i sold (nearly 200 percent all told). i've put off the land plans and when i go back in this time, it's for the long haul. seriously. i realize that i got lucky, and i'm lucky right now that i have a chunk to go back in with during such a market nadir, but i'm not disillusioned enough to think i can pull it off twice. hence the bulk going into long-term retirement style funds. what do you think of my fund choices flagpole? i know you are a fan of vanguard.
thanks!
No need to apologize about 'panicking'. You sold and it continued its plunge so you are ahead. You did better than everyone who held. The future will change things. Nevertheless you are ahead.
Good job!!!
ready to take the plunge wrote:
i'll agree that i shouldn't have panicked..... it's the first time i've done that since i started investing (1991). not even during the dot com burst did i sell, but this time around, i felt like we were headed for trouble, and i was concurrently planning to buy some land, so i cashed out a chunk so i'd have a good down payment. while i was down from the 14k peak, i still made a huge chunk on what i sold (nearly 200 percent all told). i've put off the land plans and when i go back in this time, it's for the long haul. seriously. i realize that i got lucky, and i'm lucky right now that i have a chunk to go back in with during such a market nadir, but i'm not disillusioned enough to think i can pull it off twice. hence the bulk going into long-term retirement style funds. what do you think of my fund choices flagpole? i know you are a fan of vanguard.
thanks!
If by long-term retirement style funds you mean more aggressive ones, then that all depends on your age. If you're more than 10 years away from retirement, then yes. If you're within 5 years of retirement then no. Vanguard is great, yes.
In the end, the market will fix itself. In the end, we're all dead.