Monthly Archives: March 2009

Retirement Accounts: 7 Case Studies

Posted on by
Reply

retirees7Everybody has a slightly (some – like me – dramatically) differing view on the whole subject of 401K’s, ROTH IRA’s, and other forms of so-called ‘retirement accounts’.

If you are in a job, then it might be an easy decision: pull the trigger on maximum withdrawals from your salary and attract the generous employer match. Or, is it?

But, if you are self-employed – or, you have more flexibility in how you choose to handle your retirement accounts than the typical employee – then it becomes a bit more confusing: do you outsource or self-manage? Do you try and save your tax now (on deposits) or in the future (on your withdrawals)? Do you even bother …. ?

Well, if you are still confused, let these 7 ‘case studies’ from our 7 Millionaires … In Training! ‘grand experiment’ guide you:

Scott – Not everybody chooses to have a 401k – or, any type of retirement account, for that matter – and some even do it because they feel that they have an even better ‘retirement plan’. Scott is one such example … what do you think? Is he doing the right thing?

Lee – Is at (or past) typical retirement age for most of us. He thinks that he has made some (a lot?) of mistakes with his finances, yet he at least has some money put aside. But, it’s not enough to meet his goals … and, is it really enough to live off?

Josh – On the other end of the age/work scale is Josh, who still has the ‘luxury’ of living at home with his folks: free rent = more to save (or spend?). Should Josh even be saving in a system that doesn’t allow him free’n’clear access to his money until he is 3 times his current age? And, should Josh be using his ‘retirement account’ in the Grand Casino that is the Options Market?

Ryan – Is a highly paid rep. for medical equipment with some ideas of his own. He is exploring the options as to whether he should be investing INSIDE his 401k etc. or OUTSIDE, both for him and/or his wife. What advice could you give him?

Diane – Is currently assessing her options; while she does so, she is drawing down on her retirement account. Should she take the penalties and pay down debt and/or continue to draw down her living expenses?

Mark – The title of his post is 201k in reference to the beating that the stock market has given it recently, but Mark has a long-term view; it seems to me that he hopes to reach a large Number through investments, etc. and leave his retirement accounts simmering along nicely … if the meat’n’potatoes of his Wealth Strategy don’t pan out, then perhaps he’ll have a nice hot financial stew waiting for him when he reaches 60?

Jeff – Here is an example of a reasonably well-salaried government employee who has one foot in each camp: his Grandpappy once told him to invest in his 401k so that he does, as well as have a couple of residential properties. How much money – in today’s dollars – does a high-saving guy expect to accumulate by the time he reaches 60? Is it worth the wait?

You be the judge … be sure to read the comments and add some of your own 🙂

Did she win the $1 Million?

Posted on by
2

picture-4Ooops, I slipped up … I left some of our readers hanging …. did Ms Tomorrow Rodriguez win the $1 Million??!!

More after the break 🙂

First, I want to recap on the post; I wanted to know if you would take the Banker’s offer in this unique situation:

4 suitcases left: 3 of them contain ONE MILLION DOLLARS and 1 contains only $300!!

Ms Rodriguez – with the odds clearly stacked in her favor – has two choices:

1. Take the Banker’s Offer of $677,000

OR

2. Say “No Deal” and select just one more suitcase (then she will be presented with another offer)

Deal or No Deal?

The arguments ‘for / against’ basically fall into three distinct camps:

1. The Strictly Mathematical

The ‘math guys’ talk about a concept called ‘Expected Value’ (used a lot in gambling … which is what Deal / No Deal really is) that Wealthy Canadian does a great job of explaining … in the context of this post … here. Wealthy explained the Expected Value of this deal as:

The banker offered $677,000, a 9.7% ‘discounted’ offer. Lower than the expected value and therefore not a good deal.

Rick expands on this to explain why he would not take the Banker’s Offer:

If they offer 10% less than the expected value then going again is risking a loss of $77K to gain $323K with a 75% chance of success. I would definitely try again!

2. The Greedy Grabbers

These guys – and gals – want the $1 Million … that’s all there is to it! And, why not? It’s ‘free money’ after all … as explained by Josh – the Croupier’s Friend:

I would say no deal. The odds are in her favor, a situation which doesn’t happen a lot in life. Much like blackjack, when you have an eleven and dealer is showing a six, double down and wager as much as possible when the odds are in your favor. Take advantage of the situation while there is a situation to be taken advantage of.

3. The Life Changers

These people may – or may not – intuitively understand the math (i.e. the Banker always gives you a slightly cr*ppy offer to ‘keep you in the game’ … after all, who would watch if most shows didn’t go down to the wire?!) but, they understand that $677k – albeit not sounding quite as good as saying that you won $1 Million – is a sh*tload of money!

I think that this group’s mindset is best summarized by RRPF who said:

I picked deal.

I admit that I cannot make truly rational (from a pure mathematical/economics standpoint) decisions in cases where the stakes exceed around 5x my income. If you divided all the amounts by 10, I’d say no deal without too much thought. But 677k is probably going to be 400k or so after taxes (projecting future bracket changes for 2009). that leaves me enough to put my entire financial house in order AND have well over 300k left over as a foundation for the future.

Seems pretty sensible to me … it’s all about the ‘utility’ of the money, as explained by Rick Francis (in justifying why he would take two more shots, but no more):

The utility of the additional money is NOT linear for me. Getting $450K would make huge changes in my life. However, I don’t think that the $1M would result in even twice as much of a difference. Because of that I would not be willing to risk the $450K and would take the sure thing.

So, what would I do?

Well, I would like to say that the utility of the money for me is such that I could keep pulling the trigger for the ‘fun’ and bragging rights of aiming for the full $1 Million, but I have to say that I agree with the one lone voice who voted …

… NOT SURE.

You see, we are not faced with million dollar decisions every day (OK, I’ve had a few in the past few years … even so …) so, psychologists will tell you that we have no idea how we will respond under that kind of pressure – c’mon, you’ve seen the war movies where the ‘hero type’ freezes under fire and the ‘wimp’ runs up to the bunker in the face of horrendous machine guy fire to throw a bag of grenades into the fox hole (it’s a shame that he usually gets killed in the process … hopefully he remembered to pull the pin, first?!).

So, it’s easy enough to guess what we are going to do, but any resemblance to what we actually will do is probably purely coincidental. That’s why we need systems … something that I covered in a previous post.

deal-case-noOh, and yes, Tomorrow – who obviously didn’t ‘need’ the $677k – did go on to win the $1 Million … this IS America, after all 🙂

Another way to mitigate risk?

Posted on by
Reply

riskquadrant

Say that you’re a venture capitalist who has found some semi-reliable way of categorizing entrepreneurs on their capacity to undertake action with / without first doing a lot of research … which group in the above matrix would you be most likely to back (assuming that they all come to you with equally good ideas, etc., etc.)?

Before I share my views, I want to quickly talk about risk: you see, we have some readers who, I believe, are overly concerned with risk …

… as it happens, I am (by nature) one of them, struggling to overcome my own ‘addiction to fear‘. I’ve done OK, but not without some personal psychological ‘cost’ along the way … nothing serious, just a few extra grey hairs … maybe 10 or 20 years off my life … the usual 😉

One of the ways to avoid risk, course, is to do some research before you take irrevocable action; it’s the old proverb:

Look before you leap!

newcokeComing from my famous 20/20 hindsight, though, I can say that this an overblown theory. The reality is that too much research is just as dangerous as not enough … perhaps more so.

Let me explain …

Let’s say you take on a project and despite years of research before you plunge into it, it fails!

Can’t happen?

I have only two words for you: New Coke 😛

So, you’re out …

Now, let’s look at somebody a bit more ‘gung ho’ … they jump into one project after another, fail early and failing often … but, in just about the time that it took for you to jump into (and crash back out of) your Well Researched Project they have finally struck gold (after failing 4 times) … 5 times lucky 🙂

Contrived example?

Perhaps not as much as you might think …

… you see, venture capitalists work on the Power of 10 Formula; for every 10 businesses that they fund:

  • 7 Fail, causing them to lose their entire investment
  • 2 return their initial investment, nothing more
  • 1 makes it all worthwhile

Despite all their research, VC’s can’t tell in advance which of these businesses would succeed (or, they wouldn’t bother investing in the other nine, d’oh!). What ‘saves’ the VC is action … they act/fail/act/fail …. act/succeed.

So, if we look at people on a scale (in the chart above) of how much  research they tend to do in advance of action (or, otherwise), I would much rather back the guys in II over the guys in III; I would almost be prepared to back the guys in II over the guys in IV simply because of their capacity to implement more ideas sooner … in my book, trial and error in the real world produces faster results than any form of theoretical research.

What’s the takeaway?

Get started in something that has a low set-up cost and you can get into the market (and, out of again) quickly … if it succeeds, more power to you. If it fails (as it probably will) you can dust yourself off and try/try again.

Internet businesses are ideal ….

At last a post that agrees with me!

Posted on by
11

There is a ray of hope in a Personal Finance blogosphere that currently seems to be ruled by Ramsey Clones: Moolanomey says that you should NOT pay off your mortgage early:

I can now say for certain that I fully oppose the idea of paying off your mortgage early because there are several related factors that make this a bad idea.

Yay!

[AJC: I’ll leave you to read Pinyo’s excellent post to discover the ‘several related factors’ for yourself]

Look, if Pinyo’s post – or, my earlier posts – haven’t yet convinced you, let me draw it out for you:

We have two people, each sitting on a $150,000 house with a $100,000 mortgage remaining; they both have just signed up for a 25 year fixed rate mortgage … their payments are currently $585 at 5%. They both decide that they can afford to ‘invest’ an extra $100 a month.

Person A

This person puts the extra $100 a month into their mortgage, shaving off 6 years on the total time to pay back the loan, saving $20,000 in interest in the process.

Being a smart investor, and once the loan is fully paid off, this person then starts to put both the mortgage payments AND the extra $100 a month into an Index Fund and waits 25 years to cash out (hopefully, allowing enough time to get as close as possible to the 30 year 8% stock market return ‘guarantee’ that he’s heard so much about).

Person B

This person lets the mortgage ‘ride’ and instead invests the $100 ‘extra money’ a month straight into a low-cost Index Fund returning an average 8% over a 30 year period, adding the mortgage payment at the end of the 25 year period when the mortgage is paid off, then waiting the additional 19 years so that he finally cashes in his financial ‘chips’ on the same day as Person A.

The Result

At the end of (19 + 25) years or (25 + 19) years – depending upon which person you are 🙂 – you have an identical and fully-paid off house (so, the value of that is irrelevant in this comparison) and an Index Fund.

Let’s see how you fared with that Index Fund …

picture-3

Now, we’re looking at a very simplified example, where the homes only cost $150,000 to begin with, and we’re only adding $100 a month … yet the difference between the two graphs represents a total additional return to Person B of nearly $100k by NOT putting the additional money into their mortgage.

In the ‘real world’ he would be even better off by:

1. Increasing his additional monthly investment in his Index Fund to at least match inflation,

2. Expecting better than the worst-case 30 year stock market returns that I have provided for here,

3. Reinvesting the ‘tax advantages’ of the larger remaining home mortgage.

Which camp do you sit in?

A strange conjunction of posts …

Posted on by
2

I was skimming through the alltop.com listings of personal finance blog titles as I do from time to time, when I came across these two posts  on Ranjan Varma’s blog:

Timing the Market is Nonsense

and

Quantum Gold Fund Gives 29.7% Return

I don’t know about you, but I rolled on the floor laughing … if you don’t see anything ‘wrong’ with the juxtaposition of these two headlines you’re wasting your time reading my blog 😛

But, it’s the first article – on market timing – that I want to talk about … because there’s an interesting (and very short) ‘slide show’ embedded in it that I want you to see:

http://www.slideshare.net/thinkingcarl/average-is-not-normal-presentation?type=presentation

There are two points that the slideshow ‘author’ makes that I want to discuss here …

Average is Not Normal

The creator of the slide show suggests that in the last 80 years the stock market has “averaged” a 10% return, but in only 2 of those years has it actually returned anywhere near 10%

picture-11

Timing is Everything

The slide show creator then uses that data to (erroneously, in my opinion) reason that timing in the stock market is actually critical … for example, would you want to start investing here?

picture-12

or, here?

picture-2

So, where would you rather invest? Come on, be honest?

Before I tell you where I would invest, let me tell you where the real big bucks are to be made …

… the real money is to be made in the second chart; investing at the peak of the market!

But, it only works if you can recognize the peak:

Jesse Livermore, the legendary trader of the 20’s and 30’s reportedly made and lost a fortune 4 times before he (understandably) blew his own head off. One of his greatest profits came when he SHORTED the market on the day of the famous stock market crash that heralded the beginning of the Great Depression. We’re talking so much money that the President of the USA called him to beg him to stop because he was singlehandedly making the market crash worse!

Given that I’m not Jesse (and, neither are you) my answer is:

I don’t care …

… you see, whether the curve is up in the beginning, smooth all the way, ziggy zaggy every which way in the middle, I only care what my starting and ending numbers are. And, what I do know is that, over a 30 year period (based upon ANY continuous 30 year period starting on any day that you care to name in the past 75 or so years … INCLUDING purchasing on the day before the greatest stock market crash in history … the one that saw the beginning of the Great Depression), the stock market will NOT give me less than an 8.5% return.

So, I will only buy stocks for 30 years as an investment (or less, if I feel like gambling) … or 20 years, if I only need a ‘guaranteed’ 4% return …

If the market happens to ziggy zaggy up in the right ways, and I’m lucky enough to get somewhere near the averages, well, there’ll be some extremely happy charities and surviving family when I die 😉

The Frugal Billionaire

Posted on by
13

scrooge-35232scrooge1I just love people who pursue frugality for frugality’s sake … like it’s an end, rather than a means to an end.

For example, take this really interesting post on Grad Money Matters where he points to a bunch of rich old men who live like misers:

Some of the world’s wealthiest people … also happen to be some of the most frugal.

  • Despite having a net worth of $62 billion and being the world’s richest man, famously frugal investor Warren Buffett still lives in the same home he bought for nearly $31,500 some 50 years ago.
  • John Caudwell used to ride his bike 14 miles to work everyday and cut his own hair because he didn’t want to be bothered going to the barber despite having amassed a fortune of over $2.2 billion. Caudwell also purchased all of his clothing off the rack at British retailer Marks & Spencer.
  • Jim Walton, member of America’s richest family and Wal-Mart scion, reportedly drives a 14-year-old Dodge Dakota despite having a net worth of $16.4 billion.
  • Retail Tycoon Frederik Meijer, worth $2 billion is known to drive cars with very high MPG and prefers to only stay in budget motels.
  • Gene Burd, a 76-year-old journalism professor at the University of Texas has donated over a million dollars to financial foundations but walks 6 miles to work everyday, lives in a very tiny apartment, picks up pennies on the ground, and wears shoes that he found in the trash.
  • Ingvar Kamprad built a $33 billion fortune after founding Ikea but the Swedish tycoon drives a 15-year-old Volvo, tries to avoid wearing suits, and flies coach. It’s also said (surprise, surprise) that Kamprad furnishes his home entirely with affordable Ikea furniture.
  • Indian billionaire Azim Premji worth upwards of $17.1 billion drives a Toyota Corolla and stays in the company guesthouse rather than 5-star hotels when he’s traveling on business. At a lunch honoring his son’s wedding he even served the food on paper plates.
  • We would be amiss to not mention some of the highest earning dead celebrities who are perhaps the most frugal of this list due to their inability to spend 🙂 For example, top earning dead musician, Kurt Cobain made about $50 million last year. Elvis Presley made $42 million despite having died in 1977 and, in third place, Peanuts creator Charles M. Schulz earnings were about $35 million.

*About the author: This list was compiled by Lewis Bennett, writer for an Individual Voluntary Arrangement (IVA) site.

I have a word to describe this kind of behavior: sick.

You need to ask yourself two questions:

1. Did these people become rich solely because they were frugal?

2. Is their current level of frugality sensible, given their net worth?

There’s no doubt in my mind that you will NOT become rich unless you learn how to delay gratification, but that is not the same as NO gratification. If you can afford to spend on a reasonable lifestyle and you choose not to, you MAY be just as ‘sick’ as the person who lives beyond their means and spends uncontrollably.

On the other hand, if you simply have no interest in the ‘trappings’ of life, that’s entirely a different matter … but, one then wonders why you bother with the whole “let’s get rich” thing, anyway?

But, here’s what I suspect really happens:

1. Some rich people are so driven by the process of making money that they never know when to stop … some take one step, one chance, one risk too many and lose their money, while others just keep going on and on and on, driving themselves – and, their families – to an early grave. There are exceptions of course: those like Warren Buffett who so enjoy what they are doing that they would be doing it even if they were not paid.

The ‘antidote’ is to work out your Life’s Purpose and if it’s to make money … then go until you drop! If not, pursue the financial path until you have acquired enough money to live your Life’s TRUE Purpose, then stop … and, live!

2. Some learn the lesson early that you need to delay gratification and live frugally if you want to avoid spending all the fruits of your labor (rather than reinvesting in your future) but become so driven by the process of saving money that they never know when to stop …

… in my opinion, there’s NO lesson to be learned from a multi-millionaire or billionaire who lives like a miser … other than they are great counterpoint to those billionaires who live overly and ridiculously flamboyantly.

To me the ‘right’ path is simple: live comfortably within your means … whether that is a $50k a year lifestyle or a $50 million a year sustainable one.

Real Cashflow, Fake Cashflow – Part IV

Posted on by
6

layformula

For new readers: Do NOT APPLY … this was my 2009 April Fools Day Joke 🙂

Thanks everyone for your comments and support for the first money-making opportunity that I have ever announced on this blog! I wanted my loyal readers to have first opportunity. Sure, it’s a bit unusual (horse racing), but it comes from a trusted source … and, we never know where the next opportunity will come from 🙂

However, Expressions of Interest have now CLOSED!

But, stand by as there will be a follow up post announcing how The System works and what it means for you next Thursday …
___________________________________________

This is the fourth – and, final – installment of our series on the three types of Positive Cashflow Real Estate:

1. Tax Cashflow

2. Fake Cashflow

3. Real Cashflow

After introducing Tax Cashflow “cleverly designed to make Negatively Geared real-estate look like a good deal”) we spoke about manipulating the amount of deposit that you put into a property to ‘force’ it to produce a kind of ‘Fake’ Positive Cashflow.

This kind of cashflow comes at the expense of: (a) cash – you are typically forced to put in a lot – and, (b) returns: typically, the more cash you put into an investment, the lower its return.

So, what is the secret? Simple, it’s to look for a property that produces …

Real Cashflow

For some unknown/stupid reason, we look at property exactly the wrong way around:

We let the bank and public opinion of the day tell us how much capital (i.e. deposit) to put in; then we look for the greatest tax benefits; then …

… we buy!

Of course, there is no ‘secret’ to Positive Cashflow Real-Estate at all: we should simply ALWAYS treat ANY property acquisition as though it were a business … and, we would NEVER buy a business that needs to be manipulated in order to make money:

First, it must produce cash …

… then we can ‘tweak’ the income statement and balance sheet for greater tax benefits and return on capital.

It’s exactly the same with property; the problem is that we:

(a) Buy in the wrong market – we buy when everybody else is buying and property is too expensive, and

(b) Buy in the wrong sector – we buy what everybody else is buying – residential real-estate, which rarely produces positive cashflow … and, when it does, it’s usually a ‘dog’ when it comes to appreciation.

So, here is the real 7million7years Patented Positive Cashflow System:

1. Look for real-estate that will produce Real Positive Cashflow with a reasonable deposit (say, 10% – 35%); typically, this will be commercial real-estate … BUT, in the current market (low prices and low interest rates) you will probably find some residential real-estate nuggets if you look hard enough. Just don’t forget to lock in the interest rate, or you may find your diamond turning into a lump of coal as interest rates rise again.

2. Then, tweak the deposit that you actually put in according to the Fake Cashflow return that you want to get: in the Making Money 201 wealth accumulation phase, I recommend putting in ‘just enough’ deposit to break-even (perhaps with a buffer for contingencies, unless you have the spare income to cover these elsewhere) and then using you spare cash to buy another!

3. Then, take every tax deduction that you can get! Accumulate the extra Tax Cashflow that you get until you have enough accumulated to put down as a deposit on another property.

If you buy right … then manage your capital and tax right … you will have a large and Positive Cashflow real-estate portfolio before you can say “negative cashflow sucks lemons”.

If you can’t find one now, you ain’t looking hard enough 😉

Tax implications of converting your home to a rental …

Posted on by
2

layformula

This is your last chance to take part in a foolproof money-making scheme … even if you have NEVER bet on a horse in your life, I personally GUARANTEE that this System (previously known as ‘Lay Formula’) WILL work for you! If you do want to take part in this once in a lifetime opportunity, read yesterday’s post here and register your interest NOW.

Expressions of interest close in 24 Hours!
___________________________________________
deathtaxes

Despite the length of this title, today’s post will be really short … because I have NOTHING to add on the subject of taxes. They are something to be paid – or not paid – depending on the advice of a QUALIFIED tax practitioner (accountant and/or attorney) in the area that you are interested.

Personally, I have only a slight hiccup in signing tax checks for over $1 Million (as I have for the last 2 tax years in a row) because it means that I have made a TON more money 🙂

… and, I rely totally on good advice; but, I pay for conservative, specialist opinion where necessary.

However, I have noticed that I number of my readers (and contributors) have recently converted their own residences into rentals, so I thought that I should perform a Reader Service by pointing you directly towards the excellent Tax Tips Blog so that you can read some excellent advice, straight from the “horse’s mouth”:

http://glgcpa.com/blog/2009/02/18/convert-personal-residence-to-rental/

Disclaimer: I have NO IDEA whether this is good, bad or indifferent advice … that’s what your accountant is for! 🙂

But, I would like your opinion …

Exciting Money Making Opportunity!

Posted on by
14

I’m taking a break from my normal postings today to announce a ‘secret’ project that I have been working on with my close friend, and horse racing phenom, Derren Brown.

A few months ago, he unveiled in the United Kingdom a foolproof horse-racing system that has been making him … and subscribers … millions of pounds. This is absolutely on the level as the above video shows [if clicking on the above embedded video doesn’t work, click this link instead] … the video has not been ‘tweaked’ and all horses WERE selected in advance using The System.

I am excited to be able to say that I have acquired SOLE RIGHTS to the package WORLDWIDE (outside of the USA) and am looking for a limited number of Partners to put up $2,500 capital each to test the system in various jurisdictions (including the USA) … preliminary tests have shown The System to be as FOOLPROOF here as it has been in the UK.

__________________________

If you are interested in joining me in this LEGITIMATE OPPORTUNITY … please watch the above video, then register your interest in the comments section below (I can pick up your e-mail address from there). YOU MUST DO THIS WITHIN 48 HOURS.

This IS the only ‘get rich quick’ scheme that I know that is PROVEN to work, which is why I am not only endorsing it, but financially backing all of those smart enough and brave enough to put up a small part of their own cash ….

__________________________

Here’s what the experts are saying about The System:

The Astonishing, Simple, Ingenious, AND PROVEN Fast-Cash Secret Of An Inspired Betting and Gaming Entrepreneur.


“Punters look for winners, not fancy colour adverts endorsed by famous racing personalities. The System© may come with modest presentation, but has proved to be an explosive winner-finding system that leaves its flashy competitors far behind. The System is definitely an investment and not an expense.”
Odds On Magazine

“After researching the past 8 years results, we found winning runs of 1 x 18; 4 x 11; 13 x 7; 27 x 8 and over 50 winning runs of 9. Prepare yourself to be truly astonished – The System is worth its weight in £20 notes, and really puts the punter in the financial comfort zone! In our test, The System© wins with its ears pricked and plenty in hand. Good VFM and no ongoing costs!”
Business Opportunity Magazine

“I have found The System© to be a truly remarkable winner-finding system. On receipt of your system I had 4 losers on the trot, and thought here we go again another system that fails to deliver! However, I persevered and had 7 winners on the bounce – NOT ONE LOSER – then another 4 winners – magic! Also, I believe I am one of the first to pilot your new Premium Version. Well, last month (January), I had 18 winning days, 5 overall losing days, and 2 days with no qualifiers – Brilliant! “I sometimes wondered whether it was possible to break-even when betting, never mind make a profit, and was on the merry go round for many years! My search is now over, and I have closed the door on receiving any more offers by taking my name off all gambling mailing lists. Many thanks.”
A. Burns, Hereford, UK

The System is currently the only Step-By-Step FOOL-PROOF Automated Betting System GUARANTEED TO SELECT THE WINNER EVERY TIME to be made available on the Internet, and that could increase your income by up to 1,000% month after month… without lifting a finger, regardless of whether you are a professional gambler or have never placed a bet in your life

You see, horse betting is more of a mathematical formula based on the right staking plan than anything else. and if as well as having the right staking plan and selection plan you can also have it all automated for you, then it becomes child’s play.

They fully understand that due to the many “bogus” betting systems out there many people would be skeptical when they hear about the great results being achieved with this program, that is why they offer every new member the option of an introductory one week Trial. For proof, watch this incredible video …

________________________

That’s it … expressions of interest close in 48 hours. I personally stand behind the effectiveness of The System!

AJC.