Letters to the Editor
-
Andrew, Andrew, Andrew
It's so unfair to call these clowns on their BS.
-
I love clowns
Nice circus. Now where's my bread?
-
Here's an idea: let's eat Mr. Fisher.
Let's dispense with the obvious: a multimillionaire has no business telling the rest of us not to worry. No matter how objective Mr. Fisher thinks he might be, he himself speaks from a position of absolute confidence, if not nonchalance.
I've got a proposal: a 100 percent tax over all net income over $1 million. If you can't live on that, you're delusional. Use the money to give U.S. citizens the kind of top-notch society that Denmark and other social Democracies give their citizens -- the true First World countries, as opposed to the lame-ass second tier countries like the United States.
Whattaya say, Mr. Fisher? Can you get by on a measly one million dollars a year? Not to worry, pal: most people get by on a twentieth or less of that.
-
As Dependable as the Weather - - - - -
The problem with the Joe & Sally Schmucks of America that fill the Rank & File membership of the 2 parties (which so happens this political season means "Democrats") -- IS -- that they haven't the foogiest clue about how an economy operates.
Before pontificating about the Mean Old 'Other Guys' are responsible for pushing the country into a Recession, Said Pontificator(s) ought sign up for a few remedial classes in micro & macro economics -- and thereupon discover that Recessions come & go --- as dependably so as does the weather change. And its been this way since 1776, and before ---
Of course its a political year and thus the Joe & Sally Schmucks will Dependably rise up by the thousands to blow Hot Air out the Backside with their simplistic comprehension of How the World Works.
-
Fisher Investments - Fishing for Busniess
Yes, recently he has been wrong more times than he has been right, but remember, he also predicted 9/11! :)
Seriously though, if he was only wrong, it would be not so bad, what is really bad is that he goes around intimidating and suing people that write about his sub par strategy and performance.
Recently and very briefly I was a client of Fisher Investments. I quickly got disgusted with their loosing strategy, fired them and wrote an article. (Did I mention that I am a newspaper publisher?)
Fisher didn't like the article and in an apparent attempt to shut me up, they filed a bogus arbitration case against me. If you are curious, my analysis of Fisher Investments is on Odesskiy Listok newspaper website.
Even if you don't get through the entire post (it is a rather long one), don't miss the links at the end of it!
-
What's the point?
If you are trying to demonize Ken Fisher this is not the right approach. ANYONE who sells financial advice for a living can be made to look ridiculous after the fact, and Ken Fisher is among the less egregious of the charlatans out there (think of Jim Cramer on Mad Money).
-
two words: passive investing
It's the only way to go, period. Over time, you can't lose. Anyone who's trying to sell you investment advice is out there to make money off of you. Whether it's Ken Fisher or this or that mutual fund. Even Warren Buffett has had horrible years. If you compare Berkshire's performance with a correctly diversified portfolio of index funds, you'll see that you can beat the Oracle over time, and with less risk, less volatility and much, much smaller fees. There's no secret here, it's all in the scholarly literature. Google Fama and French.
-
Set it and forget it
The truth is as anonymous posted above is that a great majority of investors would be much better off investing in a wide range of index funds.
Studies have shown that even when aa active fund out performs the market most of the underlying investors don't. They get in when the fund has a history of doing well so they don't actually profit from the run up of that performance and they bail when the fund underperforms thus selling at the worst possible times.
There are some managers that out perform the market consistently over long periods of time but if you break down their performance on an annual basis it will be below the market about 40% of the time, which I believe is the case with Buffet. Remember the tech bubble? People were saying Buffet had lost it since he did not invest in that sector and for a while significantly under performed the market. At this date who would you have rather been invested in? People are myopic and need instant gratification which hinders their investment making decisions. When you find a fund manager whose decision making process you trust then you need to give him a long timeline to give you results.
For instance the famed Bill Miller has just had 2 down years in a row and quite a few investors are abandoning ship. This is the worst time to do so if you still trust his decision making process you should be plowing more money into this fund now.
I have to admit I don’t know much about Ken Fisher but I was under the impression he was strictly formula based. Ie PE ratio etc, in his investment decision making which I have little to no interest in.
-
I meant to post
that most investors would be better off investing in a range of index fund check in on them every year and determine the reallocation of the funds going into the funds in the upcoming year. Best of the best would be to dollar cost average on a monthly basis but that might be asking to much.
-
Three rules of investing
1: Never buy an opaque investment plan. If your broker is unwilling to tell you what you have invested in, it is because most of the money you are investing with that broker has either gone into overheads, or the broker's back pocket.
2: Look around and think for yourself. If you see big problems coming in the housing sector, act accordingly. If you just follow what the experts say you are a sheep, and will be fleeced accordingly.
3: Don't always follow the herd - if you do you are a lemming and will end up following the herd over a cliff.
What is all amounts to? Be informed and think for yourself.