Retirement Accounts: 7 Case Studies

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 🙂

The Frugal Billionaire

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.

How fast is frugality?

save-v-invest

I love it when I read interesting posts on the personal finance blogs and other forums … take Mighty Bargain Hunter‘s view that frugality is the fastest way to a better bottom line:

It shouldn’t be the only way you’re improving your bottom line, but it does give results, fast.

For someone who already has their finances under good control, some money-saving activities are simply too little payback for too much time … [but] what about the people who aren’t as well off?  Maybe they’re making $40k or $50k, but have a lot less saved up than they probably should for their age.  This is the situation for which packing your lunch, buying generic, buying used, skipping Starbucks, and clipping coupons will help.

And it helps immediately.  The week you take lunch to work at $2 a day instead of hitting Subway at $5 a day, you’ve improved your bottom line by $15.  Boom.  Or brew your coffee in the morning instead of hitting Starbucks.  $10 per week.  Boom.  Instant gratification.

Building up income streams takes longer, especially the kind of income streams you want (passive ones) … higher income may be better in the long run, but that’s the long run.

Frugality is here and now.

Businesses have taken this view for a long time now … they call it cost-cutting 🙂

Usually a business that is spending its time cutting costs is a business that you should selling out of, not buying into …

… it’s current finances may begin to look great, but its future may be bloody awful (that’s why it’s busy cutting costs!).

On the other hand, a GREAT business invests in their future (sales and marketing, product development, R&D, production, etc.) while managing their costs.

So, let’s put it to the test: how fast is frugality?

Well, to find out, I put four scenarios into the Magic Excel Blender and here’s what it spat out:

Save: If you earned $100,000 a year and cut corners so that you could save 20% to stick in your mattress, at the end of 20 years, you’d have $400k stashed away.

Invest: If you only managed to save 10% a year and spent your time investing the proceeds wisely (@ 8% p.a.) you’d end up with $460k in (say) stocks.

Save + Invest: But, if you did the sensible thing and invested your savings instead of stashing it under your mattress (in other words, save 20% then invest it @ 8% … hardly rocket science), you’d end up with more than $920,000 after 20 years, and still have dividends each year to live off … a much better result for only a little extra work together with some belt-tightening.

MM101: However, if you did the really sensible thing, and built up your income (so that you can afford to reinvest the dividends), saved well (at least 20%, but only of your original level of income), and invested both the dividends and the savings wisely (@ 8% p.a.) after 20 years you’d have over $2.5 million.

Frugality may be quick (in that we can afford to pay a bill; pay down a pressing loan), but will never make us rich …

… that’s why we take a multi-faceted view to personal finance:

Making Money 101 – to ensure that our costs are under control and free up some cash to help us invest in MM201

Making Money 201 – to grow our income by investing what little cash we may have (to begin) wisely and maintaining sound MM101 ‘habits’ to ensure that we have ever-growing streams of investment income, keeping our growing personal ‘needs’ (read: expenses) in check, so that we can eventually reach our Number

Making Money 301 – to manage our Number (i.e. our nest-egg) so that it lasts as long as we do, while living the life that we have designed for ourselves, not the life that others have resigned us to.

The perfect way to allocate your spending?

I saw this on Get Rich Slowly and wonder what you think of it?

Since I didn’t allocate my own spending this way ‘on the way up’, I can’t comment either way … but, maybe some of you can?

Here’s how it works:

You take your After Tax income and divide it into three categories:

1. Needs – These are you ‘must haves’ i.e. things that you can’t go without: rent/mortgage; car; electricity; basic food (the book provides a ‘rule of thumb’ for this); and, so on.

You allocate 50% of your after tax income to these needs; given that we already have the 25% Income Rule (spend no more than 25% of your after tax income on rent/mortgage) that leaves 25% on all the other ‘needs’.

2. Wants – According to the book, you should have fun – and, budget 30% of your after-tax income for it. I happen to be of the same mindset … what is money, if not for spending (except that you must do it in a way that allows you to live your Life’s Purpose by your desired Date). 

According to the book, ‘wants’ include additional food (i.e. lamb chops instead of dog food?), your cable TV and internet (these are definite needs for me, especially on my 100″ home theater screen … but, I can afford it!); trips and vacations; and, so on.

3. Savings – that leaves (or should leave) 20% of your after-tax income for your 401k investments and other savings/investment … since this is 5% to 10% more than most authors suggest, I commend it. Just remember, that even with 20% you’re not going to be able to save your way to wealth.

All in all, it seems like a pretty good savings plan to me … what improvements would you make?

The FDIC might insure up to $50 Million of your deposits!

If you’ve ever thought about starting your own online business but didn’t know where to start, check out my latest post on I’m About To Find Out If You Can Make Money Online!!

_______________________________

Everybody (by now, I hope) knows that the FDIC will insure up to $250,000 of your deposits (recently increased from $100,000 in order to instill confidence in the American banking system), provided they are with an approved bank (most reputable banks are) in the event of a bank failure.

There are some questions as to how quickly you will get your money back … but, at least you know your principal is (relatively) safe, thanks to the FDIC.

But, the $250,000 limit is a real bitch – or, one day will be (!) – for our readers, but JT steps in to save the day:

I found this while looking for information on interest rates for bank accounts with multi-million dollars, and protection for those types of accounts. Like many I knew about the 100k FDIC coverage for normal bank accounts, but I was curious if I had more how could I protect it if I had it in an account. This is what I found,

There is something called CDARS which allows multi-million dollar FDIC protection. CDARS = Certificate of Deposit Account Registry Service. From what I gather it uses it’s network power kind of like a clearinghouse to place large deposits with other FDIC insured banks to give multi-million dollar accounts supposed risk free FDIC protection up to 50 million. It’s a CD, so I believe there is a 2 year min, I could be wrong. Again, I read this rather quickly, and I say I believe, and what I gathered during my explanation. So bottom line is, read it for yourself. LOL I did a search on CDARS, and multi-million dollar FDIC and it popped up with a lot of links.

I saw this question started reading, and though the info I found belonged here. I’m not a banker, or a finance person I was just curious. So for anyone who just happens to have an extra 50 mil stuffed in a mattress some place it looks like there maybe a way to protect that money! LOL

JT is right, there is at least one ‘clearing house’ that (for an appropriate fee, of course) takes care of opening accounts in you name across as many banks as necessary to break your deposits up into lots of no more than $250k each … effectively FDIC-insuring up to $50 million  … legally!

But, you probably do not need to go through all of this … did you know that you can actually FDIC-Insure (and, this happens automatically, provided that you comply with the regulations) as much as $1.75 million in a single bank, without resorting to any third parties or paying any extra fees?

You simply open up different types of accounts: a deposit account for $250k in your name; another one for $250k in your name; a third one – this time a joint account (i.e. in both names) also for $250k; a fourth for your ROTH, and so on – and, it’s all legal!

But, there is a limit (about $700,000 will max out most people) …. then you just go and repeat at a second bank 😉

Now, not only does the FDIC allow this – they actually promote it in their own brochure (this brochure hasn’t yet been updated to allow for the increase from $100k to $250k per account name/type):

Basic Insurance Amount Is $100,000

The basic insurance amount is $100,000 per depositor per insured bank. Certain retirement accounts, such as Individual Retirement Accounts, are insured up to $250,000 per depositor per insured bank.

If you and your family have $100,000 or less in all of your deposit accounts at the same insured bank, you do not need to worry about your insurance coverage — your deposits are fully insured.

Coverage Over $100,000

The FDIC provides separate insurance coverage for deposit accounts held in different categories of ownership.

You may qualify for more than $100,000 in coverage at one insured bank if you own deposit accounts in different ownership categories.

Common Ownership Categories

The most common ownership categories are:

Single Accounts

These are deposit accounts owned by one person and titled in that person’s name only. All of your single accounts at the same insured bank are added together and the total is insured up to $100,000. For example, if you have a checking account and a CD at the same insured bank, and both accounts are in your name only, the two accounts are added together and the total is insured up to $100,000.

Note: Retirement accounts and qualifying trust accounts are not included in this ownership category.

Certain Retirement Accounts

These are deposit accounts owned by one person and titled in the name of that person’s retirement plan. Only the following types of retirement plans are insured in this ownership category:

  • Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs) including traditional IRAs, Roth IRAs, Simplified Employee Pension (SEP) IRAs, and Savings Incentive Match Plans for Employees (SIMPLE) IRAs
  • Section 457 deferred compensation plan accounts (whether self-directed or not)
  • Self-directed defined contribution plan accounts
  • Self-directed Keogh plan (or H.R. 10 plan) accounts

All deposits that an individual has in any of the types of retirement plans listed above at the same insured bank are added together and the total is insured up to $250,000. For example, if an individual has an IRA and a self-directed Keogh account at the same bank, the deposits in both accounts would be added together and insured up to $250,000.

Naming beneficiaries on a retirement account does not increase deposit insurance coverage.

Note: For information about FDIC insurance coverage for a type of retirement plan not listed above, refer to the FDIC resources on the back of this brochure.

Joint Accounts

These are deposit accounts owned by two or more people. If both owners have equal rights to withdraw money from a joint account, each person’s shares of all joint accounts at the same insured bank are added together and the total is insured up to $100,000.

If a couple has a joint checking account and a joint savings account at the same insured bank, each co-owner’s shares of the two accounts are added together and insured up to $100,000, providing up to $200,000 in coverage for the couple’s joint accounts.

Example: John and Mary have a $220,000 CD at an insured bank. Under FDIC rules, each person’s share of each joint account is considered equal unless otherwise stated in the bank’s records. John and Mary each own $110,000 in the joint account category, putting a total of $20,000 ($10,000 for each) over the insurance limit.

Account Holders Ownership Share Amount Insured Amount Uninsured
John $ 110,000 $ 100,000 $ 10,000
Mary $ 110,000 $ 100,000 $ 10,000
Total $ 220,000 $ 200,000 $ 20,000

Note: Jointly owned qualifying trust accounts are not included in this ownership category.

Revocable Trust Accounts

These are deposits held in either payable-on-death (POD) accounts or living trust accounts.

Payable-on-death (POD) accounts – also known as testamentary or Totten Trust accounts – are the most common form of revocable trust deposits. These informal revocable trusts are created when the account owner signs an agreement – usually part of the bank’s signature card – stating that the deposits will be payable to one or more named beneficiaries upon the owner’s death.

Living trusts – or family trusts – are formal revocable trusts created for estate planning purposes. The owner of a living trust controls the deposits in the trust during his or her lifetime.

Note: Determining coverage for living trust accounts can be complicated and requires more detailed information about the FDIC’s insurance rules than can be provided in this publication. If you have a living trust account, contact the FDIC at 1-877-275-3342 for more information.

Deposit insurance coverage for revocable trust accounts is based on each owner’s trust relationship with each qualifying beneficiary. While the trust owner is the insured party, coverage is provided for the interests of each beneficiary in the account. The FDIC insures the interests of each beneficiary up to $100,000 for each owner if all of the following requirements are met:

  • The beneficiary is the owner’s spouse, child, grandchild, parent, or sibling. Adopted and stepchildren, grandchildren, parents, and siblings also qualify. In-laws, grandparents, great-grandchildren, cousins, nieces and nephews, friends, organizations (including charities), and trusts do not qualify.
  • The account title must indicate the existence of the trust relationship by including a term such as payable on death, in trust for, trust, living trust, family trust, or an acronym such as POD or ITF.
  • For POD accounts, each beneficiary must be identified by name in the bank’s account records.

If any of these requirements are not met, the entire amount in the account, or any portion of the account that does not qualify, would be added to the owner’s other single accounts, if any, at the same bank and insured up to $100,000. If the revocable trust account has more than one owner, the FDIC would insure each owner’s share as his or her single account.

Note: The following example applies to POD accounts only. Coverage may be different for some living trusts.

Example: Bill has a $100,000 POD account with his wife Sue as beneficiary. Sue has a $100,000 POD account with Bill as beneficiary. In addition, Bill and Sue jointly have a $600,000 POD account with their three children as equal beneficiaries.

Account Title Account Balance Amount Insured Amount Uninsured
Bill POD to Sue $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 0
Sue POD to Bill $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 0
Bill & Sue POD to 3 children $ 600,000 $ 600,000 $ 0
Total $ 800,000 $ 800,000 $ 0

These three accounts totaling $800,000 are fully insured because each owner is entitled to $100,000 of coverage for the interests of each qualifying beneficiary in the accounts. Bill has $400,000 of insurance coverage ($100,000 for the interests of each qualifying beneficiary – his wife in the first account and his three children in the third account). Sue also has $400,000 of insurance coverage ($100,000 for the interests of each qualifying beneficiary – her husband in the second account and her three children in the third account).

When calculating coverage for revocable trust accounts, be careful to avoid these common mistakes:

  • Do not assume that coverage is calculated as $100,000 times the number of people –owner(s) and beneficiary(ies) – named on a trust account. Coverage is provided for the interest of each qualifying beneficiary named by each owner. Additional coverage is not provided to the owners for naming themselves as owners. For example, a father’s POD account naming two sons as equal beneficiaries is insured to $200,000 only — $100,000 for the interest of each qualifying beneficiary.
  • Do not assume that the FDIC insures POD and living trust accounts separately. In applying the $100,000 per-beneficiary insurance limit, the FDIC combines an owner’s POD accounts with the living trust accounts that name the same beneficiaries at the same bank.
  • All you need to do, is be prepared to handle a few different accounts … doesn’t seem that difficult to get the peace of mind that you need when banks start failing …. apparently, there’s more to fail, yet.

    You can calculate your insurance coverage using the FDIC’s online Electronic Deposit Insurance Estimator at:  http://www2.fdic.gov/edie

    It's not what you earn that counts …

    I wrote a post a short while ago assessing whether the rich should invest in Index Funds.

    I received a few interesting comments, including this one from a reader named Mike, that I thought I should share with you all:

    Would you do a post that considers the lifetime earnings of different people? Reason being I read an article that high school graduates earn an average lifetime earnings (from 25 to 64) of $1.2 Million. For people with a college degree this goes up to $2 million, with a Masters it’s up to $2.5 million and a PhD brings in $2.9 million. For people with professional degrees (doctors & lawyers I presume) the number goes up further to $4.4 million. Still not bad, an average of $100K per year for the latter category. For the purpose of this article I’m assuming that all earnings are reconciled to net present values.

    So you’ve managed to earn $7 million in 7 years
 that’s really impressive and nearly twice that of a doctor’s lifetime earnings. What have you earned throughout your life?

    For me I’ve earned $2 Million in my life to date. More than half of this has come in the last 3 years. I’m 35 now and have been working since I was 23. I figure between now and age 65 I should be able to earn a total of about $8 million more with an medium / optimistic case. I will pursue investments but realize high risk brings high reward but potentially devastating losses. For example I’ve taken a large position ($110,000) in a Chinese stock with what I believe to be very strong fundamentals and have researched this company for the last 4 months in detail. In the last 3 weeks the stock is down 30% from where I bought in
! So I don’t put everything into high risk investments for that reason.

    I think starting a business has elements of this
 if your business crashed you would have lost it all I guess?

    Firstly, here is the official government report that I believe Mike is referring to:

    http://usgovinfo.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/p23%2D210.pdf

    However, I am totally unconcerned with income or lifetime earning potential … I believe that there is very little correlation between what a person earns today – or over their lifetime – and, how wealthy that they are …

    … you see, it’s not what passes through your hands, but what sticks that counts!

    I remember reading the book that passes for a ‘bible’ amongst the personal finance community: The Millionaire Next Door (because, to a casual reader, it appears to equate ‘frugality’ with ‘wealth’, which of course is only a small part of the story) and was struck by the story of two doctors:

    Both were on super-high incomes, yet one doctor was ‘rich’ and the other ‘poor’ …

    … one had saved/invested a good proportion of his ridiculously high earnings, but the other had lived the ‘high life’ and was in debt.

    Same income … vastly different outcome.

    So, when Mike asks:

    So you’ve managed to earn $7 million in 7 years
 that’s really impressive and nearly twice that of a doctor’s lifetime earnings. What have you earned throughout your life?

    … I say: I didn’t ‘earn’ $7 million in 7 years in the traditional sense; plenty of corporate CEO’s, super-high-flying attorneys, and some medical specialists earn more that that in 7 years (some in 1 year).

    In fact, at the time my ‘take home’ and total combined business incomes were less than many professionals earn, and certainly nowhere near the stratospheric heights that I just mentioned …

    … no, I ‘earned’ the $7 million by investing my far more modest earnings and my Net Worth grew faster than my earnings ever could.

    Keeping the ‘two doctors’ story in mind, do you now see why I don’t care what my lifetime income was? If not, consider Mike’s closing question:

    I think starting a business has elements of this
 if your business crashed you would have lost it all I guess?

    The answer to this question is the key to Making Money 301 (keeping your wealth) and explains why income is so unimportant from a wealth perspective:

    For the ‘poor doctor’, when his income stops so does his (financial life); if he loses his ability to earn his ‘paycheck’ through some disaster (he certainly doesn’t have the luxury of retiring, yet) he is just on broke!

    But, it’s possible that our ‘rich doctor’ may be O.K. albeit at a lower standard of living … at the very least, he is debt free. At best, he has some passive investments to help sustain him and his family … probably not enough to sustain his current lifestyle, though.

    In my case, I ploughed as much income into investments as possible and waived all ‘pay increases’ (I could have ‘paid’ myself a higher proportion of my business profits, but chose not to) …

    … in fact, my wife kept working, as she earned more than I took home.

    In doing so, we put ourselves in a position where it would not matter if the businesses crashed … we would not have lost it all. In fact, the bulk of the $7 million in 7 years was in passive real-estate … selling the businesses just two years later was the ‘cream on top’.

    The Making Money 301 ideal is this:

    Earn money, plough 100% of it into investments, live off the income of these investments as though you were already retired … increase your spending only as the portfolio income increases.

    Simple and self-sustainable … of course, for most people, the ideal is not achievable, which is why you start with ploughing 10% of you income into investments, and build from there …

    BTW: Visit this week’s Carnival of Personal Finance; we have an article published there ,,,

    Cash is an investment, too

    Aspiring ‘investors’ tend to laugh at low-return strategies like keeping money in CD’s or paying down mortgages – and, as a long-term investing tool (now, that’s a tautology) they do suck.

    But, as a short-term ‘money parking’ tool there’s nothing better … and there’s no time like the present to dust off those borin’ ol’ Ramseyesque strategies, as this article from the Tycoon Report suggests:

    The most successful investors in the stock market aren’t always invested in stock. They’re only invested when the odds weigh heavily in their favor.

    You must have the discipline to know when to stay out!  For most people, this is one of the easiest concepts to grasp, yet the hardest to follow.  This is something that comes with experience. It’s something that most people have to learn several times throughout their investment life.  

    People ask: “When do I know when it’s the right time to be in or out?”  The answer is: If you’re asking that question, it’s time to stay out.

    Otherwise, find an account or stable investment vehicle that offers you a nice interest rate.  You can look at Treasuries, Certificates of Deposit, money market accounts or a bank or broker offering a relatively high-yielding interest rate.

    The point is to sit in something safe while you wait for trades with a high probability of success to present themselves. 

    Savvy investors are willing to sit in a risk-free interest bearing account for years if need be, and you should get comfortable with taking the same stance.  What’s likely tied for first place on the individual investor’s list of most common mistakes is the notion that if you’re not in the market, you’re not making money.  Anxious and over-eager investors force trades at the wrong time, mainly because they’re afraid of missing the next big gain.  

    Fear of missing the next winner is a killer.  Professional investors know that cash is a trade too.

    I love that last line … that’s why I ripped it for the title to this post!

    Right now, I am sitting in cash … and, I have been totally out of the market for a few weeks now even though there was a rally in between.

    I am waiting for the right time – read: after the market starts climbing again (I’m happy to miss the absolute bottom) and I am sure that represents a longer-term trend OR until I find a stock that I feel won’t go much lower even if the market doesn’t rally for a while.

    Same applies for real-estate, although I am actively looking for deals right now … residential isn’t my preference (I have plenty of exposure to that sector) as I am totally out of commercial right now and would like to get back in if the cash-on-cash returns improve a little (as they should as the recession takes hold, then eases a little).

    Having said that I am in cash … it isn’t in your ordinary Mid-West Bank deposit account or CD … it’s legally earning 7.5% interest, hedged against the falling US dollar.

    That’s why it’s often true that the rich get richer … because they have more investing options.

    Still, the principle applies: sometimes, it’s OK to stay in cash or [AJC: perish the thought!] temporarily pay down a mortgage.

    Is this the future of money management for children?

    I know that there have been a number of posts on other blogs about a new savings product called SmartyPig.

    I initially dismissed their site [AJC: particularly because they USED to have a $25 fee – now gone … site is now totally FREE – and they didn’t offer a ‘cash out’ option – now also gone … you can get your money back as a wire transfer to your bank or as a Debit Card] … but, reviewed their FAQ’s, I really believe that they have something interesting here.

     What triggered my second look was an e-mail that I received today from Jon Gaskell, one of the co-founders of SmartyPig:

    I had a very interesting conversation last week. It was with a young lady saving for a down payment on her first home with her fiancĂ©e. They want every penny they can scrape together funding that goal – especially the presents she is anticipating receiving when she finishes up graduate school later this spring. 

    They thought they had found the perfect way to reach this goal faster when they stumbled upon SmartyPig, she told me. They were really excited about the public contribution piece and the social nature of SmartyPig. They thought the widget would draw attention and letting friends and family members know about their goal would keep them focused.

    The next day, when my business partner, Mike Ferrari, and I spoke to a mother who is using SmartyPig to not only teach her 10- and 12-year-old sons how to save “in a cool way,” but is using SmartyPig to help them save up for their cars when they turn 16. 
     
    When our site update is complete, the customer will have a third option when he or she has reached their goal: an ACH transaction back to their checking or saving account.

    There you have it, a quick’n’easy way to set up a specific account to save up for a specific goal – whether large (e.g. a car) or small (e.g. an iPod) … in fact, that is the advantage that SmartyPig has over typical bank accounts [AJC: SmartyPig is supported by a bank, hence all deposits are FDIC Insured]:

    It is easy to separate money into ‘pockets’ for specific savings goals.

    I’m not sure what their future plans are, but I see a big future for them  – in addition to the Adult-saving-for-‘stuff’ market – I see a particularly big opportunity in the kids market.

    Most kids’ allowance sits in cash … for example, we divide our kids allowance into two: Savings and Spendings, which means that we would need to open at least two Smarty Pigs accounts for each child, with one having a Goal of ‘Retirement’. Actually, our kids are smart enough to roll their retirement savings into my Scottrade account, so they are fully invested in my stock portfolio … but, for most people, simply having an account where kids earn interest on their money is a big step ahead of sitting in cash in the top drawer of their bed-side table! 

    From a marketing perspective [AJC: I simply can’t help myself!], the founders of SmartyPig COULD gain tremendously by writing two books:  

    1. SmartyPig – Sensibly Spending Your Way to Wealth – this would be a Making Money 101 book squarely aimed at breaking down the debt and credit-card mentality. Any personal finance blogger worth her salt could ‘ghost write’ or, even better, co-write this with them. 

    2. SmartyPig for Kids – which would lay out a simple – naturally, SmartyPig-supported – process for dividing money earned by doing chores etc. into Savings and (possibly, more than one) Spending/s accounts. It would lay out a basic money-management philosophy for children to follow that will help lay the foundation for a consumer-debt-free, savings/investment-driven adult life.

    The children’s angle, I believe will be where the growth is for SmartyPig, as their product (with some, minor modification) solves a real need …

    … but, the account balances involved will be small and the demographic (i.e. children) will not be as lucrative, so some some additional ‘smart marketing’ will be required to drag the parents along for the ride.

    Now, I haven’t tried SmartyPig myself, yet, so please don’t consider this an endorsement until I (well, more likely my children, as I don’t really need to save for ‘stuff’ any more) have tried it …

    On the other hand, if you have tried it already, please let me know what you think!

    The Great Debt Repayment Fallacy … don't fall for it!

    Everybody knows about ‘good debt’ and ‘bad debt’, right? And, we all know – and have committed to memory – Personal Finance Prime Directive # 1:

    Eliminate All Bad Debt Now … Before Doing Anything Else!!!

    This may be the current Personal Finance mantra, but, if you happen to subscribe to the same view, then read on because this post could be the most important piece of wealth-building advice that you will ever read!

    But, first …

    That simple and clear ‘PF Directive’ was the assumed premise behind a recent (and very good, I might add) post on The Simple Dollar that I want to delve into a little more deeply than usual because it brings out a critical wealth-building point that may not be obvious to all. In that post Trent said:

    A reader wrote in recently:

    I have kind of a weird situation with our 2 credit cards, and wanted to see what you thought. We have one card (Citi) with a total balance of $4,800. $3,800 of this is a balance transfer that is at 2.99% until paid off. The remaining $1,000 is at 13.49%. Of course, all principal payments are applied to the lower rate debt first. Our other card (Chase) has a balance of $5,700, and is at 0% until September 08, when it goes to 8.99%. Which card do you think is best to “attack” first?

    After reading this email, I thought it would be a good time to take a more general look at comparing the debts you owe as well as how to construct a healthy debt repayment plan.

    Trent then proceeded to outline a very good and pragmatic approach to dealing with these, and any other, debts … a plan that involved: 

    A few sheets of paper and a pen; the latest statement for every single debt; making the first list; ordering all of the debts by their current interest rate; looking for ways to reduce the rates, focusing most strongly on the highest current one; when you’ve reduced rates, making a new list reflecting the changes; dealing debts that are set to adjust in the future; directing all of your extra payments towards the top debt on the list; when a debt vanishes, crossing it off and feeling good about it; updating the list when you acquire a new debt; and, updating the list when one of your debts adjusts to a new rate

    Before I weigh in on this, let me ask you a Very Important Question:

    Do you really just want to be debt free or do you want to be rich?

    I know that sounds self-evident, but stick with me … if you just want to be in the top 5% of the US population and retire on $1,000,000 in, say, 15 years then by all means, do the Dave Ramsey, Suze Orman, and/or Oprah ‘debt diets’:

    That is, save and be debt free (including your own home) … whoohee! … by the time you ‘retire’ [read: work part-time in Costco handing out free food-samples until you’re 75], you’ll be living on the equivalent of $15,000 today  and hoping to hell that the government can still afford to pay you social security!

    It’s OK if you slavishly follow this thinking: it’s the Conventional Wisdom …

    It’s just that if you want … nay, need … to be rich(er) and retire soon(er) then you’re going to need unconventionally large amounts of money in an unconventionally rapid timespan, and that’s going to take some Unconventional Wisdom!

    You see, I believe that being debt free and being rich are [almost] mutually-exclusive!

    This is a pretty controversial view, I should think … but, I will even go so far as to say that it is [almost] impossible to become rich without using debt: debt to fund your business (working capital finance and/or leases on equipment and/or leases on vehicles, etc.); debt to fund your real-estate investments (fixed interest mortgages and/or interest-only funding); debt to fund your stock purchases (margin lending); etc.

    Hold on, all the Personal Finance writers/bloggers out there say:

    We can put all of the above examples in the ‘good debt’ category and we already agree that they are OK …

    Great!

    But, then they always add:

    … but, ‘bad debt’ is ‘consumer debt’ (credit cards, student loans, car loans, etc.) and we all know that our Number One Personal Finance Objective is to wipe Bad Debt out, right? After all, it’s not called ‘Bad’ for nothing! Right??!!

    Well, not necessarily … sure you shouldn’t get yourself INTO any of this Bad Debt … but, once you have some (you naughty, failed human being, you), you need to mix it with your Good Debt and revisit Trent’s Plan with ALL of your debts in hand … both ‘Good’ and ‘Bad’.

    Look at it this way, once you find yourself with a mix of both Good (appreciating and/or income-producing assets) and Bad (depreciating, consumer goods) Debts, the only things that matter are:

    1. Paying off the Dollar Value of the Bad Debt as quickly as possible, and

    [AJC: Here is the key … its in the “AND]

    2. Paying off the highest after-tax interest rate loan off first.

    So here was my advice to the person who asked the question on Trent’s post:

    Interestingly, in the reader’s case (if I read correctly) his ‘consolidated’ card is at a Combined Effective Rate of only 5.2% 
 because he can’t attack the 13% portion until he pays off the 2.99% portion I would do the following:

    1. Pay off the other card first, then

    2. Buy an investment using the money that he would have paid the 5.2% debt off with 


    … after all 5.2% is a very low rate of interest!

    To clarify: I would not pay either card when interest rates are under the standard variable mortgage rate 
 I would be financing new real-estate, or paying down the mortgage on my existing (IF I’m not breaking the 20% Rule). The plan I outlined above starts when the 0% period ends … until then, pay off NEITHER card IF you have a more productive use for the money!

    What does this mean for the rest of us?

    i) Don’t get INTO Bad/Consumer Debt … save and pay cash for any ‘stuff’ (cars, vacations, furniture, ipods, computers, etc.) that you want.

    ii) Once you do get INTO Bad/Consumer Debt … don’t be in such a hurry to get out of it; compare the cost of your Student Loans; Ultra-Low-Honeymood-Rate credit-cards; Super-Low-Suck-You-Into-Buying-More-Car-Than-You-Can-Afford Interest Rate car loans; etc. against the after-tax cost of the mortgage that you have on your house and/or investment properties (or the interest rate on your Margin Loans for your Stocks; or your Working Capital Finance for your Business; etc.).

    iii) Work out a repayment plan as though you were going to pay INTO that Bad/Consumer Debt … instead, pay an equivalent amount off against your highest after-tax interest rate loan across your entire Good/Bad Debt portfolio.

    iv) Reevaluate at the earlier of Quarterly (i.e. every 3 months) OR when one of the interest rates on ANY of your loans changes OR [yay!] when you have paid one of your loans off.

    v) If you don’t want to (or can’t) get out of a higher-interest loan early using (iii) then compare the cost of the lowest-interest loans that you have (regardless of whether they are Good/Bad) against the current FIXED interest rates for new loan on a new investment … if LESS, buy new instead of pay off old.

    Remember: The Object of Personal Finance is to end up with MORE money … the object isn’t to SAVE money, PAY off debt, BUY a house, START a business … they are all just all steps along the way.

    If you want to get Rich(er) Soon(er) never, ever confuse A Means To An End with The End

    … now, let the flames begin!

     

    _______________________________________________________________________________________________

    Casting Call

    Last days for ‘pre-applications’ to become one of my 7 Millionaires … In Training! Click here to find out more …

     

     

    Thinking of buying something on credit?

    Mr Bean Cartoon Image

    ‘Need’ a plasma TV? Perhaps you ‘just’ need a new car?

    There’s ALWAYS a way to find the money that you need WITHOUT putting yourself further in debt … just ask Mr Bean :

    http://youtube.com/watch?v=42AHISKy2Kk

    Mr Bean (a.k.a. Rowan Atkinson … played the priest in 4 Weddings and a Funeral) is not as well known in the US as he is overseas … he’s one of my favorite comedians and comedic actors.

    Anyhow, I hope that you enjoyed this short clip for today’s installment of our Video on Sunday’s series as much as I did?!

    AJC.