How much return can u get from £100K?

bendix

Lokolo wrote: »

How do you know the person doesn't want to invest?



...

Go back and read the original post. She asks what return she might get from $100,000 after tax.

To me the question is so wide as to be meaningless. You might answer 1.5% from a deposit account, and I could similarly reply (with equal validity) that she could have got 300-400% had she invested in single shares like Fresnillo or Kazakhmys. Both would have been right.

So, a return from what? Capital growth? Dividends? Interest?

Do you know, cos I'm damned if I do.

This suggests to me she is relatively unsophisticated as an investor and is really talking about interest in a bank account or something similar.

Don't worry laddie. When you're older you too will be as wise and perceptive as me.

Lokolo

bendix wrote: »

Go back and read the original post. She asks what return she might get from $100,000 after tax.

To me the question is so wide as to be meaningless. You might answer 1.5% from a deposit account, and I could similarly reply (with equal validity) that she could have got 300-400% had she invested in single shares like Fresnillo or Kazakhmys. Both would have been right.

So, a return from what? Capital growth? Dividends? Interest?

Do you know, cos I'm damned if I do.

This suggests to me she is relatively unsophisticated as an investor and is really talking about interest in a bank account or something similar.

Don't worry laddie. When you're older you too will be as wise and perceptive as me.

I'd rather have kids, a wife, family and friends tbh.

BUT you can't say they aren't thinking of investing. Poor old flops hasn't returned!

boomerangs

bendix wrote: »

Go back and read the original post. She asks what return she might get from $100,000 after tax.

Wrong again, it's £100,000 not $100,000

bendix

Lokolo wrote: »

BUT you can't say they aren't thinking of investing. Poor old flops hasn't returned!

Fine, if you're going to be a pedant about it, that's true. But - by the same logic - you can't say she IS thinking of investing based on the post either.

Given that the lady is recently seperated and obviously has income issues, I think it is fair to assume that security and a safe and steady income would be relatively high priorities. Which - frankly - rules out oil related stocks and points instead to something fundamentally different.

It's financial advisory 101.

bendix

boomerangs wrote: »

Wrong again, it's £100,000 not $100,000

Oh, for the love of God. What is this thread? Some kind of online gathering of Pedantry International?

It's a freaking typo.

Lokolo

bendix wrote: »

Fine, if you're going to be a pedant about it, that's true. But - by the same logic - you can't say she IS thinking of investing based on the post either.

Given that the lady is recently seperated and obviously has income issues, I think it is fair to assume that security and a safe and steady income would be relatively high priorities. Which - frankly - rules out oil related stocks and points instead to something fundamentally different.

It's financial advisory 101.

I don't disagree with you there.

dunstonh

Dividend yields? Oil stocks.

And Digger hasnt posted yet either

bendix

dunstonh wrote: »

And Digger hasnt posted yet either

I can do that for him, to save him time.

Buy Gold. Blah blah blah. It's a no-risk investment. Yadda yadda yadda. You never will own a worthless piece of gold, ad nauseum, ad infinitum.

Oh, and just for fun, get some premium bonds.

bendix

Lokolo wrote: »

I don't disagree with you there.

. . . . which leads to what conclusion . . . .?

chesky369

There are many supplementary questions that spring to mind regarding the OP's position. She says her husband is moving out soon, she works part-time and she has to support herself and her son. Things like, what effect does this inheritance have on any maintenance her husband may have originally agreed to; who pays the mortgage/rent - what does she see as her long-term goal?