Tag Archives: Investing

What’s the best financial move that you’ve made?

Posted on by
13

Michael asks What was the best financial move you’ve made so far? and then tells this story about his car:

I’ve concluded my best financial move to date has been my decision to keep cars for very long periods of time. I drove my first car for over seven years before it died. My second car just passed 100,000 miles this last weekend and is over nine years old.  So, here I am in my late thirties and I’m still on my second car.

Having no car payment during 9 of the last 14 years has allowed me to spend more in other areas of my life where I value such spending while still permitting me to save substantially for my future.

What an excellent question!

I’ll tell you my best financial move, then perhaps you can share yours?

I have a few ‘best financial move’ candidates (including moving to the USA, selling out just before the Great Recession, and others that I will tell you about some other time), but I can pin my ‘best’ financial move – not my biggest, but my best from a pure financial strategy point of view – down to one:

My accountant talked me into buying my own building (I had a small’ish call center operation but was renting office space at the time).

Making the purchase was very tight, financially, as the business wasn’t making a lot of money (there was a bit of juggling to come up with the cash for the deposit and making the monthly payments!). I really sweated as I was making the bids at the onsite auction (that’s how most properties are sold in my home town).

[AJC: Property valuation technique # 1: Q: How did I know how much to pay? A: I didn’t! But, I did know who I was bidding against (very important to know who your ‘opposition’ is) … a property developer. Logic told me that he would not buy for more that true current value, because it would be reasonable to expect him to buy-rehab-sell or buy-rebuild-sell. If – on the other hand – I intended to buy/use/hold, then it stands to reason that I could afford to pay AT LEAST as much as him. So, I just kept bidding until he stopped, and ended up paying just $1,000 more than his highest bid.]

To backtrack a little, I had already decided that I would buy prime real-estate in prime location, instead of buying a cheap building in an industrial area (typical for call centers, to keep costs low).

So, instead of spending, say $500k or so on a cheap industrial-area building, that’s how I found myself spending $1.35 mill up front at that auction and another $500k (100% financed) on the rehab and fitout, once I closed on the deal.

Why?

Well, I saw two major benefits:

1. It was a show-case building that I thought would be my ‘shop front’ for our ‘Fortune 500’-type corporate clients, making them think we were bigger (therefore better/safer to deal with than our opposition) than we really were, and

2. I guessed that it would have great resale or redevelopment value down the line.

As things would turn out, this was one of those rare occasions when I was right … on both fronts!

Our business grew substantially in that building with many a deal completed in our own board room.

[AJC: Once the Internet era arrived circa 2000, we created a fully web-enabled system – way ahead of its time – at which point it became advantageous for us to make our sales at our clients own premises. Once they saw the drop-dead gorgeous – by 2000 standards – web-enabled charts and graphs, they virtually signed our standard contract on the spot! Our office could have been in a garbage dump then, and it would no longer have mattered. Oh, good times … good times!]

In doing so, I avoided 5 years of rent, reduced my taxes by $500k (because of the rehab), paid down about $500k of the principal, and eventually sold the  building for $2.4 million.

Once business picked up (again, partly because of the marketing / credibility benefits of such a professionally fitted out building in such a prime location) I barely noticed the payments, and probably would simply have raised my personal spending had some of the profits not gone into the mortgage and rehab repayments.

Instead, after 5 years of mostly tax-deductible ‘forced savings’ I walked away with what felt like an extra $1.5 million in my pocket. Not my grandest move, as things would turn out, but certainly my (financially) most astute …

… I encourage every business owner to do the same!

So, what’s your best – not necessarily your grandest – financial move?

Fitting another square peg into a round hole …

Posted on by
17

I need your help on a small project that I am working on! I have a new FaceBook Page for Top Secret Startup Project # 4 and need 25 people to “like” the page in order to get a proper URL. Would you PLEASE take exactly 10 seconds to visit that page by CLICKING HERE and click the “like” button.

I might even send one of you (by random selection) a surprise gift (HINT: think ‘apple’ and think ‘card’) AND you will be amongst the first to know what I’m up to over the next few weeks! Now, back to today’s post …
________________________
Philip Brewer is the first to break ranks … that makes him a pioneer!

He’s the first personal finance writer to question the validity of the 4% Rule; I’ll let him do what he does best … explain:

There’s a rule of thumb that’s pretty well known to retirement planners: the 4% rule. It states that if you spend 4% of your capital in your first year of retirement, you can go on spending that much — and even adjust it for inflation — and you won’t run out of money before you die. That rule is starting to look kind of iffy.

The rule is just an observation: Over the past hundred years you could have followed the 4% rule starting in any year and you wouldn’t have run out of money. That’s been true because the return to capital has been pretty high, and because downturns have been pretty short.

So, that’s the genesis of the 4% Rule … basically an assumption that if inflation runs at 3%, you can get at least 7% return on your investment (the difference being the amount you can spend: 4%). But, most investments haven’t ‘returned’ 7% – or anywhere near that – for quite some time, as Philip explains:

Stock investors saw some price appreciation in the 1990s, but there’s been no appreciation since then. In fact, your stock portfolio is probably down over the past decade, even with reinvested dividends.

… and bonds and cash haven’t fared much better, certainly not enough to keep up with inflation and provide spending money for a retiree!

The problem is we’re trying to fit a square peg into a round hole:

Square Peg

Bonds, cash, and stocks are all capital investments (my term); they are designed to hold (preferably, appreciate) the capital that you put in.

You create ‘income’ from these investments: (a) from their (relatively speaking) meager dividends, and/or (b) by selling down your portfolio as needed. The 4% Rule says that the amount that you need to selll down SHOULD be offset by the increase in value of what you have left even after accounting for inflation.

The problem is in the ‘SHOULD’ word: this should all work, but as Philip points out, there are times when it doesn’t …

Round Hole

When you are retired you shouldn’t spend capital unless you print the stuff … or, at least, have an unlimited supply.

You don’t want capital, when you are retired, you really want income.

Specifically, you want a certain amount of income – and, you want regular pay increases (at least enough to keep up with inflation) – just like when you were working.

But, you want it:

a. without needing to work, and

b. without running the risk of being ‘fired’ (i.e. having your retirement income run out).

Other than some nebulous (perhaps, for you, well-defined) need to leave some of your hard-earned, precious, irreplaceable, capital behind for charity, your cat, and/or the next generation, you really don’t – shouldn’t – care very much about it, except for its ability to provide that much needed income.

So, why try and cajole capital-appreciating assets to do the work of your former employer, when there are perfectly good investments out there specifically manufactured for the sole purpose of:

1. At least maintaining their own value (ideally, after inflation), and

2. Providing you with an income, indexed for inflation, for your life or the life of the asset (whichever comes first).

A few such assets immediately spring to mind … each with their own pros/cons (which we can explore in the comments and/or future posts):

1. Real-estate: it tends to increase in value according to inflation; it tends to provide semi-reliable income that increases (again) with inflation,

2. Inflation-indexed annuities: you give up claim on the capital in return for a guaranteed (well, as long as AIG or its like stays in business) income that increases with inflation,

3. Treasury Inflation-Protected Bonds (some Municipal MUNI’s also do much the same): These guarantee that your capital will increase with inflation, and you can ladder them cleverly to provide some semblance of a (albeit low) income stream that increases with inflation.

Of all of these – and, in retirement – I like 100%-owned (i.e. paid for by cash) real-estate the best; what do you recommend?

Avoid wiggly-line investments!

Posted on by
11

UPDATE: We have a winner in my $700 in 7 Days Giveaway … yep, ‘barbaramontgom’ (with 6 points) was chosen by random drawing (see below) and wins the entire $700 Cash!!!!!! Barbara just needs to send me an e-mail ajc [at] 7million7years [dot] com to claim her $700 cash prize (less any PayPal fees)!

Bet you wished that you had entered 😉

Special thanks to Steve and Trisha who tied at the top of the leader board … if you send me an e-mail with your name/mailing address I will send each of you a $60 Apple Gift Card! Thanks to all of the others who entered and promoted the contest like crazy!

LAST CHANCE to enter my free contest: CONTEST OVER: in just ONE more today, I am giving away $700 cash to one lucky reader (drawn at random) as part of my $700 in 7 Days No Strings Attached promotion. It’s free to enter simply by clicking here.

________________

CNNMoney fields a question from a reader who’s scared that her money will run out before she does:

Question: I recently had to take early retirement at age 57 because of back problems. I’m now looking for a safe place to invest my retirement money where I’ll have no risk losing it. Any suggestions? — Donald H., Morris, Alabama

Yes, I have a suggestion: don’t post your questions to a financial ‘expert’ who still works for a living!

If you do, you’ll get answers like:

Answer: If the threat of losing principal were the only financial risk you had to protect yourself against in retirement, then finding a safe haven for your money would be pretty simple. You could plow your entire nest egg into Treasury bills or spread it among FDIC-insured savings accounts and CDs (taking care to stay within the FDIC coverage limits).

But while doing this would insure that you would never lose a cent of your money, it would also insure that your retirement stash earned a pretty measly return.

Good, so far … so, no cash. Got it!

What should she do instead (?):

If you want to have a decent shot at your retirement savings lasting as long as you do, you also want to invest in a way that has at least some potential for long-term growth.

[Keep some in cash and the] rest of your savings you want to keep in a diversified portfolio of stock and bond funds. Again, there’s no single correct mix. Typically, though, someone just entering retirement might have 50% or so of his or her portfolio in stocks and the rest in bonds.

Zowie!

Question: If you are aiming to retire, why do you want long-term growth?!

Answer: Because, you expect to lose some significant proportion of your capital to:

– Spending too much,

– Inflation,

– Market downturns.

In other words, the expert recommends to invest in a ‘wiggly line’ investment, hoping that the upswings outweigh all the downswings + spending after inflation is taken into account.

How well has that been working out for the past, oh, 20 years?

So, can you think of an investment that tends to grow with inflation, and provides income that also tends to grow with inflation?

Well those treasury-protected bonds certainly have principal that keeps up with inflation, but the returns are so low that income will become a real problem.

But, what about real-estate?

It’s where ‘the rich’ have kept the bulk of their retirement savings since time immemorial … I wonder why? 😉

A fund manager’s view …

Posted on by
9

This is a little different to all of those “this is what a millionaire thinks” posts, because Evan is in a support role (“my role is more brain storming and putting together documents and calculations….then I prepare materials for the planners’ second meeting and beyond”) at a financial planning office that specializes in sucking the blood out of – I mean assisting – high net-worth clients:

My role is more brain storming and putting together documents and calculations. So basically I see almost every balance sheet that may have significant net worth which goes through my office

Since I’m a sample of one, when it comes to high net-worth clients, it might be interesting to see what Evan sees:

The House is almost always Paid off

Prepaying your mortgage is always a hot topic on Personal Finance Blogs.  Everyone once in a while one of the big players in the field will put a post and it will garner tons of comments.  The comments are usually heated and go both ways about how the move is stupid and then invariably someone will say, its a great move.  Regardless of how you feel, most of the high net worth clients’ balance sheet that I see will have either a paid off house, or one with a very low debt to equity ratio.

They Almost Always Own a Business

Almost every high net worth client’s balance sheet has a business on it.  The types of businesses range from the mundane, lawyer who owns their practice, to beyond what I could have imagined as a viable business.

They Almost Always have Investment/Financial Advisors

Almost every single high net worth client/prospect is not hands on when it comes to their own investments.  Some are more active than others when it comes to asset allocation, but for the most part unless they are in the money business (fund managers, hedge fund execs, etc.) they just don’t deal with it.

Since Evan is coming from a position of observation of his sample size of many, I will observe from my position of a sample size of one:

– I found it valuable to have a business; indeed, it’s the ultimate driver of my financial success; even before selling the business I could use the spare cashflows (after attending to the business’ own growth needs) to fund a substantial real-estate and investment portfolio.

– I own a house, and almost always have … now that I am wealthy, I carry no debt on these houses, but started reducing my debt almost in proportion to the increase in my wealth. It’s not a strategy, just a happenstance. But, I will not hesitate to use some (perhaps, up to 50%) of that equity, if required to fund an investment.

– I certainly use an investment advisor – in fact, multiple; but (here is where my experience diverges from Evan’s observations) Evan says: “Almost every single high net worth client/prospect is not hands on when it comes to their own investments.”, yet the opposite is true for me. Could this be observation bias for either Evan (he does work for a financial planning/advisory firm, right?) and/or for me?

I would never hand the keys over to my Future Fortune [AJC: How do you make $1,000,000? Give an ‘investment advisor’ $10 million … and, wait!] to somebody who has not already made their’s … if so, why do they need me?

Thanks for sharing, Evan!

The False War On Debt …

Posted on by
11

There’s a war raging out there: it’s being fought by authors and bloggers everywhere.

But, is it the right war? Is it a just war? Or, are we just throwing ourselves, by the millions, into a hail of fire: exploding spending, rampant inflation, the death of social security?

Sure, as we sit in the relative safety of our trenches (at least, that’s what we tell ourselves, until a random mortar shell of job loss or unexpected expenses chooses to lob our way) this is not OUR future … it’s somebody else’s, or it’s too far away, or it just can’t happen …

The sad truth is that legions have jumped the wall before us and have been brutally cut down for lack of an adequate nest-egg; it’s sad to see them go over the dreaded wall of retirement (be it their time, or forced on them early) without an adequate safety net … when they do, it’s as though their grim fate had already been sealed.

Broke – or ‘just’ financially crippled – and unable (for financial reasons) to live life as they had hoped, they are a sad, sad lot.

You see, the war that they fought wasn’t – isn’t – a just war. It’s not even a war … well, it shouldn’t even be more than a skirmish.

It’s the War Against Debt!

When it comes to that war, I’m strictly a pacifist; isn’t it better to simply avoid BAD debt?

Of course, that doesn’t mean that we can’t … shouldn’t … defend ourselves.

Far from it: if we find that BAD debt has snuck through our defences, let’s keep an eye on it. And, if we find that it’s also EXPENSIVE debt, then let’s whip out the Big Guns and wipe it out. Quickly, surgically …

… but, let’s not commit Debt Genocide.

You see, unlike the well-intentioned, but largely Debt-McArthyist “ALL Debt Is Bad, So Let’s Wipe It Out” rabble out there, let’s first ask The Missing Question:

What will you do after your debt is paid off?

“Well, start investing of course!”

But, does that REALLY happen? Who better to ask than Money Reasons:

This past February 2010, I became totally debt free, but now what!

I thought that there would be a period where I would break even for a while, and then start to plow about $1,000 extra each month into investments!  So now that it’s seven months later and how much extra did I save or invest?  Not a single cent!

Hang on, the whole purpose of suiting up for battle – for going to war against debt – was so that you could start investing, right? What’s up with that, Money Reasons:

Well it’s been a matter of bad luck with equipment breaking down and needing replaced and spending too much for our past vacation to Hilton Head Island!

But it’s also been a subtle form of LifeStyle Inflation!  Thinking back now, I realize that when wants would arise, I would just go ahead and buy it.  Yeah, I thought about it a bit, but I knew that I had the cash.  Then when your car and lawn mower broke down, I had the cash too…

Money Reasons should have started investing well before all of his debt was paid off … he should have started investing as soon as his expensive debt was paid off and left his cheap debt on a regimen of minimum payments.

The problem with this war is that it’s an unjust war; as TraineeInvestor said: “Debt is a tool. Paying it off is simply choosing not to use the tool.”

Yes, becoming debt free is simply a tactic …

If you have to go and fight a war, don’t fight a war against debt …

… go and fight a war for investment 😉

All you need to know from a guy who does know …

Posted on by
4

After three years, you may be sick of listening to me – besides, by now, you should be $2 million or $3 million into your own $7 million 7 year journey, so what can I teach you? – so, here is some really important advice from Darwin Deason, a self-made billionaire entrepreneur:

Forbes Magazine: You have $100,000–where do you put it?

Darwin Deason: It depends on age and goals–but if I was young, I’d put all of it in a company that a) I could directly influence or control, and b) that I loved.

——————–

If you have your own financial advice, or feel that summarizing somebody else’s ‘personal finance system’ into “just one page” would be fun – and useful – then I have 5 x $100 Apple Gift cards to give away!

Just check out this post to join the action: http://7million7years.com/2010/10/28/just-one-page/

But, hurry … the giveaway finishes on Thursday November 11th (the last day for submissions) and the entries are already starting to come in!

Winners announced Monday, November 15.

Pay off debt or invest?

Posted on by
4

I’m publishing a whole series of posts targeting Debt … it has very little to do with conventional financial wisdom on this critical subject. Here is the second post (I have another one coming up, soon) …

______________________________

Gen-X Finance is polling his readers as to whether they would prefer to pay down debt or save:

If you have both debt and a need to save money, how do you prioritize? Some people will pay off debt at all costs before saving a penny. Others will be fine getting by with minimum payments while dumping as much money into savings or investments as possible. While others try to do a little bit of both. That’s why the poll today asks how you view this subject.

You should go ahead and answer the poll.

Now, this is such an important decision – perhaps one of the MOST important mindset changes that you need to make if you want to follow in my $7 million in 7years footsteps – that, for my new readers, I will point you again to my trademark Cash Cascade™ system (don’t worry, it’s simple and free) that replaces the Debt Snowball, the Debt Avalanche and most of the other other debt repayment systems that you may have previously tried.

Here’s why it works:

People make the mistake of thinking that there is GOOD DEBT (typically, investment debt) and BAD DEBT (typically, consumer debt) … but, this is only true BEFORE YOU TAKE ON THE DEBT.

Once you are in debt, then there is only CHEAP DEBT and EXPENSIVE DEBT. Put simply, pay down your expensive debt, until only the single digit ones (on an after tax basis) are left, THEN start investing.

This goes against the ‘pay down all debt’ theories, but works both logically and practically. Try it … and, let me know how it’s working for you?

If you’re well-heeled, you shouldn’t care!

Posted on by
4

If you’re not ‘twittering’, you’re missing out …

I always thought that Twitter was about “just got back from the dentist and he said “no cavities” … whoohoo!” or just about advertising your latest post. Well, it is both of those things … but, not anywhere near as much as it used to be. At least when it comes to ‘following’ (a Twitter term) personal finance writers.

Now, it seems to be more about genuine subject-matter-related info in small bites, as well as saying “hey, I saw this cool article on …”.

Now, that’s useful – even to me – and it will be very useful to you.

If you like, you can start by following me at http://twitter.com/7million7years … I promise that it will never (OK, hardly ever) be mundane 😉

______________________________

Which brings me to a recent tweet from WellHeeledBlog, whom I’ve just started following:

According to Meriam Webster’s online dictionary, ‘well-heeled’ means: having plenty of money.

My question is: if you are well-heeled why do you even care that Vanguard Group lowered the minimum entry level for Admiral Shares? Of course, WellHeeledBlog may not care, but thinks that some of their readers may and is, therefore, providing a useful reader service.

My point – because I like and follow WellHeeledBlog and will continue to do so – is that I don’t care and neither should my readers … long-term. Many of you may care – today (perhaps, because you are only starting on your path to wealth) – but, long-term you should not care, simply because these sorts of money tips will not make you rich.

My blogging – and, twittering – niche is to take my readers to $7 million in 7 years (or some other Large Number / Soon Date).

On the other hand, I started $30k in debt and so will many of my readers. So, this type of money-saving info is useful in the beginning of your financial journey … but, not for long – and, not for the important parts of your financial journey.

Fortunately, that’s where I step in …

You see, this sort of ‘beginner’ financial info is available everywhere, and I don’t see the point of simply rehashing stuff that you can find elsewhere.

If you do need this kind of entry-level personal financial advice, go elsewhere, find the info you need, save money, and get yourself (partially) out of debt, then come back here to find the reality of how to get rich.

That’s my niche, and I hope you are finding it as enjoyable/useful to read as I am in writing it? 🙂

You DO need $12 million to retire …

Posted on by
8

Money Ning says that you don’t need $12 million to retire.

Except on Planet AJC, ‘Ning!

Money Ning says:

Can you imagine spending $11,250 per month every 30 days until you are 70? It would actually be fun for a while, but by the 24th month, I bet you’ll be tired of buying anything. And if you just leave some money left every month? Well, down goes the savings necessary.

These humongous retirement numbers may catch our attention, but they rarely speak the truth about reality. Plus, chasing a number is a never ending game, because there’s always a higher number to go after.

When I was still $30k in debt, and going nowhere fast, I calculated that I needed $5 million to ‘retire rich’:

– That was in 1998 dollars … in 2010 dollars, we’re up at around $7.5 million

– I under-estimated what I needed; and, so will you!

Right now, I ‘burn’ around $250k per year (land taxes, school fees, vacations; house upkeep; etc.) and don’t consider my spending anywhere near ‘Snoop Dog Lavish’, but it’s WAY over Money Ning’s “$11,250 per month” … and, I can’t EVER imagine spending that little per month. Really.

To that annual spend, I add my two houses (to be fair, I’m trying to get rid of the US one), and my two cars (and some associated expenses) … there’s $12 million, and I don’t live in New York!

Of course, that’s not what everybody needs … maybe not even what ANYBODY needs … but, it is (give – not take – a few million) what I decided that I needed.

But, when calculating YOUR ‘number’, don’t go for the money, do as Money Ning suggests:

Chasing a number is a never ending game, because there’s always a higher number to go after. If you want to feel rich, the more appropriate approach is to just make sure money is out of your way, out of your life decisions, and out of the list of things that you worry about.

That’s what I did … it’s hardly my fault if the answer pointed to $5 Million, nor is it my fault that I ended up cashing out for a whole lot more. And, it won’t even be my fault, if you do, too.  😉

Beat 80% of professional fund managers!

Posted on by
5

I’m disappointed! I thought that 7million7years.com and it’s membership-site ‘cousin’ 7m7y.com were important enough to be hacked … but, they weren’t 🙁

Turns out that MANY GoDaddy-hosted WordPress sites have been similarly ‘hacked’ – with users seeing a [false] SECURITY WARNING ALERT!!! message. GoDaddy appears to be working on have fixed the issue, in the meantime, please read on for today’s un-hacked post ….

_________________________________

Shawn at Watson Inc. outlines a sensible ‘system’ – one that I have spoken about before – that beats “80%-90%” of professional fund managers [my highlights]:

Some may ask what I mean by systematic investing. Peter Lynch (Fidelity), Warren Buffett (Berkshire), and even Dave Ramsey recommend a conservative and simple approach for the typical investor: rather than trying to outsmart the markets, use benchmarks to track the markets instead. For example, the Vanguard Index 500 fund has outperformed two-thirds of all mutual funds on a rather consistent basis (Cash Flow Quadrant, 1999). Usually over 10 years, these types of index funds yield a return exceeding 80-90% of returns of the “professional” mutual fund money managers (Motley Fool, 2007). Interestingly, the average millionaire is this type of investor (The Millionaire Next Door, 1996). Although there is no 100% guarantee, this method does dramatically decrease the risk over time and provides respectable returns. Provided that one starts early enough (i.e. before mid-forties), consistent investing over time can be the key to achieving a great deal of wealth.

Now, who wouldn’t kill for a system like that?

Well, me for one … and, I’m guessing, most of you!

You see, we (7m7y readers) have a very special filter that QUALIFIES us; it’s the title of this blog: “How to make $7 million in 7 years”.

Now, there’s no reason why you CAN’T read this blog if your target is, say, $1 million in 20 years … I can’t physically stop you … but, it’s ill-advised, because most of what I say would just be ‘noise’ to you …

… just confusing ‘chatter’ that sometimes runs totally counter to what you read elsewhere.

What I say here is ‘noise’ if you really do have very modest financial goals, or no real financial goals beyond saving and trying to become debt free.

So, in my “$7 million 7 year” context, I say “so what if I can beat 80%-90% of fund managers?” because the amount that I can make simply won’t be enough to help me reach my Number … certainly not if it’s one of my main financial strategies.

Instead of worrying about the pro’s and how the vast majority are simply butchering the mutual funds that they are supposed to be wisely managing, realize that investing in the ‘market’ (e.g. by investing in a low-cost index fund as sensibly suggested by Shawn) actually LIMITS your returns to that achieved by the market: 8% over 30 years in any market, 12% in ‘average’ times, and 0% (or worse) in recent times.

Try this:

a) Plug your starting Investment Net Worth (i.e. what you could scrape together to invest) into a compound growth rate calculator

b) Also, plug in how much you think you will be able to add each year

c) Include the number of investing years that you would like to have before you finally ‘stop work’ to live off the fruits of your investments

d) Plug in any number from 1% to 12% that YOU think an Index Fund will reasonably return over the number of years that you allowed, above

e) Halve the answer that the calculator gives you to (very roughly) allow for 4% inflation, for every 20 years (or prorate, if less than 20) that you chose, above.

f) Divide your final answer by 20: on a VERY GOOD DAY, that’s roughly (in today’s dollars) what you will have to live off, each year.

If that’s good enough for you, congratulations on two counts:

1. Thanks to Shawn, you’ve just found your Ideal Investment Strategy … and, it’s easy / low risk, to boot! And,

2. You’ve also saved 2 minutes a day, because this blog – for you – is just noise …. [crackle … and, out!]

But (!), if the answer is NOT good enough for you [AJC: it sure wasn’t good enough for me! But, it just might be good enough for you – be TOTALLY honest, this could be the financial ‘tipping point’ for you] … commiserations: your life just became a whole lot harder!

If so, keep reading … I’ll do what I can to soften the blow 😉