£30,000 Investment Challenge - Can you beat it?

elliotj

Hi All,

A Simple Challenge... Whats the best way to invest £30,000 for a year in todays economic climate without risk? KISS (Keep it simple, stupid) applies... a maximum of four accounts paying tax at the basic rate.

The best I can reckon that can be done is:

• £3,600 in the obligitory Cash ISA. Scottish Widdows E-Cash ISA @ 6% AER, 6% NET
• £3,000 (Dripfeeding £250p/m x 12mths). Barclays Regular Saver @ 7.75% AER, 5.99% NET
• £6,000 (Dripfeeding £500p/m x 12 mths). Halifax Regular Saver @ 7% AER, 5.6% NET.
• £17,400 in an Alliance & Leciester eSaver Savings account @ 6.3% AER, 4.9% NET. Plus use this to Drip-Feed the other two.

Can you do better?

earlgrey_3

Unless you need every last penny, not sure if I'd regard drip-feeding as a KISS solution exactly.

Looks to me roughly as if the Halifax account will earn you 0.7% gross extra and that the average amount in the account over the year would be £3000 or so. That gives you just £21 gross extra or £16.80 after basic tax - less whatever interest is lost during each transfer.

Despite the higher rate, due to the lower limit, the Barclay's account would net you only about 60p more that the Halifax. So not exacly big bucks for the hassle of setting up two extra accounts and providing the ID etc.

You could save that much in petrol by walking to the pub instead of taking the car for a couple of weeks a year.

Lokolo

Investing without risk <---- thats not a possible sentence

earlgrey_3

Lokolo wrote: »

Investing without risk <---- thats not a possible sentence

You may be right. There's no verb but isn't "investing" one of those funny words?

Lokolo

earlgrey wrote: »

You're right. There's no verb.

Sh you know what I meant

earlgrey_3

You're an old pedant.

(And I messed that edit up good and proper.)

The_Fiddler_2

You can't drip from A&L you won't get any interest each month you make a withdrawal.

Stonk

Lokolo wrote: »

Investing without risk <---- thats not a possible sentence

Boring! Why do some people feel an overwhelming need to constantly point out the technical difference between "saving" and "investing", when it is perfectly clear what is meant from the context.

It is just as pedantic and nose-in-the-air-superior-I-know-better-than-you as those people who point out incorrect grammar. Oh, and, err, you missed an apostrophe in "that's".

(Please, nobody start on about my split infinitive!)

Lokolo

Stonk wrote: »

Boring! Why do some people feel an overwhelming need to constantly point out the technical difference between "saving" and "investing", when it is perfectly clear what is meant from the context.

It is just as pedantic and nose-in-the-air-superior-I-know-better-than-you as those people who point out incorrect grammar. Oh, and, err, you missed an apostrophe in "that's".

(Please, nobody start on about my split infinitive!)

Well if you were a regular on this forum you'd understand my point, from the last few weeks people have been saying invest, when they mean savings. Its starting to annoy me now lol.

Also err is technically not a word :p:p:p:p:p hehe.

Also eeekkk I am now over 3k posts. How sad of me

dunstonh

from the last few weeks people have been saying invest, when they mean savings. Its starting to annoy me now lol.

Shall we start one against bonds and fixed term deposits

Why do some people feel an overwhelming need to constantly point out the technical difference between "saving" and "investing",

Its quite a different meaning. If someone says invest then its suggests they are looking at investment options. If they say save, then it suggests savings options. So, getting it the wrong way round without clarification could lead to incorrect answers.

ed123_2

...if they say invest, they mean they will probabley lose the money in the stock market...