Interest Rates

shokadelika

Aegis wrote: »

Then he'll be poor for life. After all, personal gearing levels were at least partly responsible for the Great Depression. People thought markets and investments could only go up in value, and turned out to be wrong.

"Investment" strategies like the ones Trust No 1 recommends are great if AND ONLY IF the selected investments do well over a given timescale. As we've seen lately, gold is far from a sure investment, as it just plummeted about 15% recently. People jumping on his bandwagon towards the end of the rise would now be sitting with about 85-90% of their value left thinking "what just happened?" to themselves.

Quite frankly all I've seen from him is scaremongering and comments about ignoring good investment strategies completely, and I would strongly recommend that people do their own research into how risky his ideas are before they pile on the bandwagon and run into another gold bubble.

:rolleyes:

Gold has actually corrected (plummeted!???) from around £510 to £459 a fall of around 10% NOT 15% and is actually now around £467.

another gold bubble

Gold and PM's are in a bull market and have been since around 2001. In a bull market you get and should expect corrections that is healthy.
.
Do you believe all investments only ever go up in a straight line!

Investment" strategies like the ones Trust No 1 recommends are great if AND ONLY IF the selected investments do well over a given timescale.

Gold is up around 120% over five years around 20% year on year

Silver up around 200% over five years
Rhodium is up from $300 to $9,400 an ounce since 2003!:eek:

but of course it is gold that is in a bubble!

People jumping on his bandwagon towards the end of the rise would now be sitting with about 85-90% of their value left thinking "what just happened?" to themselves.

:rolleyes:

Anyone recently buying FTSE would have around 85-90% of their value left are they thinking "what just happened too"?

Anyone recently buying China would have around 50% of their value left.

Aegis

shokadelika wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Gold has actually corrected (plummeted!???) from around £510 to £459 a fall of around 10% NOT 15% and is actually now around £467.

I worked out the drop at work today at about 12-13% from the high to the low. pretty much half way between 10 and 15%. It certainly wasn't that far out. However, my point is that these prices can change extremely quickly even when they seem to be doing really well. And the prices don't have to drop by just that 10-15% either. With this sort of index you wouldn't be surprised to see much larger drops than just this.

Gold and PM's are in a bull market and have been since around 2001. In a bull market you get and should expect corrections that is healthy.

You also expect an eventual end to the bull market, and almost certainly a very sudden one as the big players offload their holdings en masse. Investing in a single commodity would therefore be a totally unsuitable strategy for the majority of small investors who as a rule do not keep up with the news to the level you'd need to for that sort of strategy.

Do you believe all investments only ever go up in a straight line!

Did I ever claim that they should?

Gold is up around 120% over five years around 20% year on year

Silver up around 200% over five years

Rhodium is up from $300 to $9,400 an ounce since 2003!:eek:


but of course it is gold that is in a bubble!

Gold was the one mentioned. As such, gold was the one I was talking about.

Anyone recently buying FTSE would have around 85-90% of their value left are they thinking "what just happened too"?

Probably, yes. The FTSE isn't a sure thing either, which is something I say on a regular basis when discussing investments. The ideal strategy is to diversify so that these little issues have less of an effect. My holding has held its value quite nicely over the last 6 months despite the FTSE and many of the world markets being much lower than they were.

Anyone recently buying China would have around 50% of their value left.

I'm still 30% down in my China holdings, which make up a small part of my portfolio. Good thing I didn't put all my money in there while it was bullish, eh?

nilrem_2

bristolleedsfan wrote: »

Or 5.3% in the case of your NS&I ISA. :laugh:

http://www.nsandi.com/interest-rates/index.jsp

You sure know how to cheer me up!

I am working on it!;)

shokadelika

Aegis wrote: »

Gold was the one mentioned. As such, gold was the one I was talking about.

TrustNoONe never mentioned the word gold on this thread yet you chose to attack only his post?.

Quite frankly all I've seen from him is scaremongering and comments about ignoring good investment strategies completely

I suspect that anyone who disagrees with your sector allocation theories will meet the same fate!.

I'm still 30% down in my China holdings, which make up a small part of my portfolio. Good thing I didn't put all my money in there while it was bullish, eh?

A simple trendline on a chart would have took you out of your position before most of the damage was done.

It is a good job you didn't invest in gold then!.

You would only be 8% down (that is!) even if you were foolish enough to invest at the recent top.

Aegis

shokadelika wrote: »

TrustNoONe never mentioned the word gold on this thread yet you chose to attack only his post?.

A little background research would show you that when he says "My investments are higher risk. If they come off, which I think they will, I'll be OK." he is referring to 100% investment in commodities, mostly gold. He's been harping on about it for a good few months now, as many of the regulars here will tell you.

I suspect that anyone who disagrees with your sector allocation theories will meet the same fate!.

Anyone who recommends that an amateur investor should put their entire savings pot into commodities, and worse into one or two commodities only, deserves everything they get from me and others. It's irresponsible and totally ignores the investor's attitude to risk along with best practice guidelines followed by professionals in the financial services industry.

In short, it's like putting a large amount of your money on a coin toss. The rewards might be high, but the risk is far too high for most people to be happy with it.

Oh, and you should maybe have a look around at my posts before you assume that I harass people who disagree with me. There are a couple of people on this forum that I think recommend incredibly bad speculation strategies, but Trust No1 is one of the only ones who recommends his strategy to damn near anyone who asks about investments while he's around.

kingmonkey

Is it prudent to use my savings to stockpile rice?

Aegis

kingmonkey wrote: »

Is it prudent to use my savings to stockpile rice?

Are you really going to eat that much rich?

shokadelika

kingmonkey wrote: »

Is it prudent to use my savings to stockpile rice?

Not if you have a rat or mouse infestation !:eek:

shokadelika

Aegis wrote: »

A little background research would show you that when he says "My investments are higher risk. If they come off, which I think they will, I'll be OK." he is referring to 100% investment in commodities, mostly gold. He's been harping on about it for a good few months now, as many of the regulars here will tell you.

Anyone who recommends that an amateur investor should put their entire savings pot into commodities, and worse into one or two commodities only, deserves everything they get from me and others. It's irresponsible and totally ignores the investor's attitude to risk along with best practice guidelines followed by professionals in the financial services industry.

In short, it's like putting a large amount of your money on a coin toss. The rewards might be high, but the risk is far too high for most people to be happy with it.

Oh, and you should maybe have a look around at my posts before you assume that I harass people who disagree with me. There are a couple of people on this forum that I think recommend incredibly bad speculation strategies, but Trust No1 is one of the only ones who recommends his strategy to damn near anyone who asks about investments while he's around.

So What !


This is a supposed to be a forum for discussion of ideas nothing more.
What makes your opinions any better than TrustNoOne Wombat me or anyone else you are all anonymus on an internet forum!.

The fact you class everyone here as a "amateur investor" reeks of heirarchy are you the Great Nanny Hand guiding investors safetly along the way with:-

best practice guidelines followed by professionals in the financial services industry.

I would assume that most people here are wise enough not to put all their money on black or red in a casino,commodity,share,unit or investment trust or anything I or anyone else states is a good investment but to constantly critique one or two posters for their own "ideas" or "portfolios" which might in turn make people think about their own money or investments stinks of censorship and is one of the reasons I rarely post anything connected with "investments".

Carnet was one of the best posters here sadly missed Cloud_Dog thankfully is still here.
as always DYOR

Aegis

shokadelika wrote: »

So What !

So what? So it's against the rules. So it's unethical to suggest hugely high risk investments as if they were the only sensible option. So it's frowned upon by the regulators of the financial services of the UK to make recommendations like that without a factfind. Do you really need more?

This is a supposed to be a forum for discussion of ideas nothing more what makes your opinions any better than TrustNoOne me or anyone else you are all anonymous on an internet forum!.

If that's your way of looking at it, then please respect my right to discuss my ideas on Trust No 1's ideas.

The fact you class everyone here as a "amateur investor" reeks of heirarchy are you the Great Nanny Hand guiding investors safetly along the way with:-

Once again accusing me of something I didn't do. Nice way to make a point.

Amateur = non-professional.

The ratio of professional to non-professional investors here is probably somewhere far closer to infinite than zero, so comments that make recommendations are undoubtedly made towards a large number of amateur investors. That's just the plain truth, with nothing hierarchical about it.

I'd classify myself as an amateur investor because I don't earn my living from making investments. I'd also stand by my claims that single equity, property or commodity investing is a bad idea for amateur investors simply because tracking the investment and predicting the movements is hard enough for someone paid to do just that. Someone wanting a first investment in addition to their cash holdings if unlikely to be skilled enough to successfully manage a commodity investment to their benefit.

As such, recommending an investment like that on a forum designed to save people money is in direct opposition to the purpose of the forum, especially when many people are enquiring after nothing more than a savings account! And since that is the case, I will continue to point out the flaws.

I would assume that most people here are wise enough not to put all their money on black or red in a casino,commodity,share,unit or investment trust or anything I or anyone else states is a good investment but to constantly critique posters for their "ideas" or "portfolios" which might in turn make people think about their own money or investments stinks of censorship and is one of the reasons I rarely post anything connected with "investments".

You know what they say about assumptions.