We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Invesco Perp High Income

1235»

Comments

  • artha
    artha Posts: 5,254 Forumite
    RayWolfe wrote: »
    No, bought and held.

    So there's still a significant amount of potential upside in this fund if the assets catch up?
    Awaiting a new sig
  • StevieJ
    StevieJ Posts: 20,174 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    JamesU wrote: »

    NW was not really applauded retrospectively for his judgement in avoiding dotcom stocks (avoided because of low dividends, hence unsuited to fund), but was indeed vindicated for not taking part in the party to make gains, once the stocks crashed.

    JamesU

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/money/investment/article3940081.ece

    Not true, I have read many articles applauding him for swerving tech companies during the boom.
    'Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher
  • RayWolfe
    RayWolfe Posts: 3,045 Forumite
    1,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    edited 6 May 2010 at 9:25AM
    No, bought and held ... what is more, I take the income! That is taken into account on my return figures but it would, of course, be higher if reinvested.
    I do criticise Mr Woodford, but I don't think he does much wrong. Others agree, the fund was about 6 billion when I jumped in and is now about 14 billion. (Figures from an unreliable memory.)
  • artha
    artha Posts: 5,254 Forumite
    RayWolfe wrote: »
    .. the fund was about 6 billion when I jumped in and is now about 14 billion.

    Wow! You must have put in a lot!
    Awaiting a new sig
  • JamesU
    JamesU Posts: 1,060 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture Combo Breaker
    edited 10 May 2010 at 4:55PM
    StevieJ wrote: »
    Not true, I have read many articles applauding him for swerving tech companies during the boom.

    For sure, me too. However, NWs reasoning for avoiding the tech boom stocks in his interview article is straight from the horses mouth. How this is reported in terms of NW being slated, applauded and proven correct, tech stocks being inappropriate for the fund, your earlier question as to whether or not this a myth etc are pedantic points. NW explained his avoidance of pre-crash tech stocks in a very modest manner based on their unsuitability for the fund.

    JamesU
This discussion has been closed.
★ ★ ★ Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351.7K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.7K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 600.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.3K Life & Family
  • 258.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.
Update Your Picture