The Dean of Wall Street

Posted on April 17, 2009 by Adrian

Five Cent Nickel (after inflation, it’s only worth a penny) uses these wise words of Warren Buffett’s teacher/mentor – and the ‘father’ of Value Investing (the art of buying a stock for less than its ‘real’ or ‘intrinsic’ value) to teach us about the value of index funds:

The recommendation to track an index rather than pick stocks may sound somewhat surprising coming from the man who wrote one of the most well-respected books ever written about picking stocks. However, as more and more investors are learning every year, index funds make a lot of sense compared to the alternatives.

5c’s heart is in the right place, but it’s not what Benjamin Graham was suggesting at all; he simply suggested that analysts and untrained investors should invest via Index Funds …

… then dedicated his life to teaching others (and, practising what he preached) how to select common stocks that will give better than average results.

The trick is that you need to become a trained investor to do so … it’s a business and like any other business, it requires training, dedication and a certain degree of risk-taking (although, I fail to see how suffering a 15% loss – as I did – while the indexes all lost 50+% is more risky?!).

Phil Town reportedly turned $1,000 into $1,000,000 using Grahamesque ‘value investing/trading’ techniques, and Warren Buffett created a $40+ Billion monolith using similar techniques … and Graham himself made millions. And, studies have shown that this is due to skill, not luck (as is the case for most successful ‘businesses’).

By all means, realize that you don’t have the skills and stick to Index Funds … because, if you DO want to invest in stocks, these experts are telling you that you MUST first acquire the skills.

Another sensational headline

Posted on April 10, 2009 by Adrian

Motley Fool are masters of the sensational headline; case in point: their blog shouts Avoid the Mistake That Cost Buffett 8 Years of Better Returns, which turns out to be a reasonable discussion of technical analysis v fundamental investing a la Warren Buffett:

Technical analysis is the practice of predicting where stocks will trade based on charts of historical pricing and volume information. There’s a certain logic to it. Stocks trade based on supply and demand, which is greatly influenced by investors’ attitudes about the stocks. The charts should reflect those attitudes and might predict where the individual stocks will go.

But Buffett discovered one small problem. Technical analysis didn’t work. He explained, “I realized that technical analysis didn’t work when I turned the chart upside down and didn’t get a different answer.” After eight years of trying, he concluded that it was the wrong way to invest.

So, what does Warren say is the right way to invest?

Well it would be unfair of me to steal Motley Fool’s Thunder [ AJC: see I, too, can write clever headlines 😛 ] …

… instead, I want to point you to an even better strategy for small-time investors who can hop in/out of positions far more nimbly than Warren Buffett:

Combining value investing with basic technical analysis as touted by Phil Town of Rule # 1 Investing ‘fame’. Phil reportedly turned $1,000 into $1,000,000 over 5 years using these strategies, so maybe you can, too?

I didn’t have this same kind of success (with stocks!), but I did only start to use these strategies as the market crashed 50+%, yet my loss (including doubling my risk by using margin lending) was a 15% loss in the US (on approx. $1,000,000 invested) v a 60% loss in Australia (on approx. $750,000 invested) and a 80% loss in the UK (on approx. $3,000,000 invested) where these techniques were NOT used.

Before you say “what a dope”, my UK ‘investment’ was actually part of my buyout, so I had no choice … but, Australia and US were my [stupid!] decisions to invest at the peak 🙂

So, a 15% US loss should actually be read as a 35% ‘gain’ over the market, thanks to these tools …

Here’s what Phil Town has to say about sticking to his technical analysis-based buy/sell signals:

For all you arrows users (Investools or Success): I buy with three greens and it’s amazing how many times I regret it when i jump the gun and buy with two. So three green.

And I get out when the stock stops going up and I get two reds down below.

And, here’s how to combine the two:

– Select a stock based upon sound fundamentals: i.e. is it trading below its long term value?

– Buy when the ‘technicals’ tell you that the major fund are beginning to buy in and sell when they are beginning to sell out.

IF this works for you (and, it has worked pretty well for me), it allows you to rid the short-term ‘waves’ in a stock’s price …

… but, you sell out for good, once your ‘value analysis’ tells you that the stock is no longer cheap.

Guaranteed Returns?

Posted on April 4, 2009 by Adrian

In choppy and down markets it’s natural to be nervous … so, it’s no wonder that investors start to look at funds that purport to ‘guarantee’ your initial capital, your return, or some combination of both.

I have a close friend who is a financial adviser, who works strictly on a fee basis, yet his practice is associated with the products of one major insurance and fund management company.

He was telling me of the rise of these Absolute Return funds that work on the basis of not only guaranteeing the original amount that you invested, but also lock in your returns to date …

– in other words, if you invest $1,000 this year and the market falls, the fund guarantees to pay you back at least $1,000

– then next year is a good year for the market and your fund increases by 10%; now the fund guarantees to pay you back at least $1,100

– but, next year there’s another market crash and the market drops by 15%; but, the fund STILL guarantees to pay you back at least $1,100

– if you remain with the fund and the market eventually totally recovers, as soon as the fund value rises above your new $1,100 ‘guarantee’ then so does your return.

There have been plenty of systems that have produced similar results … they usually do this by some combination of insurance and/or derivatives (e.g. stock options). In fact, you could replicate some of these results for yourself simply by buying the right type and duration of stock option along with the underlying stock (or index).

The problem is that all of these end up costing you money: the insurance premium and/or options are bought out of your initial (or ongoing) investments. The ‘cost’ of these ‘guarantees’ comes as some combination of increased fees or reduced returns when compared to a similar fund that does not offer the ‘guarantee’ …. it’s that simple.

You can provide yourself a similar – or better – result at far less cost: buy a low-cost Index Fund and wait 30 years to cash it out; I can virtually ‘guarantee‘ an 8.5% minimum return 🙂

A strange conjunction of posts …

Posted on March 6, 2009 by Adrian

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 😉

Time to hop back in?

Posted on February 14, 2009 by Adrian

buffett_chart1

Fortune Magazine publishes the above chart and says:

There should be a rational relationship between the total market value of U.S. stocks and the output of the U.S. economy – its GNP. [Warren Buffett] visualized a moment when purchases might make sense, saying, “If the percentage relationship falls to the 70% to 80% area, buying stocks is likely to work very well for you.”

Well, that’s where stocks were in late January, when the ratio was 75%. Nothing about that reversion to sanity surprises Buffett, who told Fortune that the shift in the ratio reminds him of investor Ben Graham’s statement about the stock market: “In the short run it’s a voting machine, but in the long run it’s a weighing machine.

Now, I don’t have a crystal ball, but it appears that most of the world’s greatest Value Investors (a technical term for ‘cheapskates’) are hopping back into the market, as this article – this time from Forbes – says:

Over the past several weeks, more and more of history’s most successful investors have turned bullish. Warren Buffett, John Neff and David Dreman–all of these gurus and others have said that they are now in full buying mode. Even Jeremy Grantham, a notorious bear, has said that stocks are cheap, as cheap as they’ve been in two decades, in fact.

I’m wondering: if you were prepared to buy when the market was high and people were beginning to speculate whether it would last, why wouldn’t you be prepared to buy (and hold for the long-haul) now, when the market is closer to the bottom than it was then?

I have some money that I can get an immediate 33% ‘kick’ by moving it from the US to Australia (due to favorable exchange rates), yet I am sorely tempted to keep it in the US and trade options with it, as I feel that there will be great volatility between a Dow of 8,000 and 9,000 … the time when traders make (and lose) fortunes.

Not suggesting that you do the same, but I am suggesting that if ever there were a time to buy (for the long-term), it might be right now … there might be deeper bottoms still to come, but there will be higher, highs as well … by buying and holding now, you will ride out those bottoms (if they come) and guarantee that you will reach the highs (when they come) … how can that be a bad thing?

Should you buy Berkshire Hathaway instead of an Index Fund?

Posted on May 22, 2008 by Adrian

After yesterday’s post which was aimed squarely at my readers who want to get rich – I hope all of you 😉 – I thought that I should write a follow-up piece aimed at the window-shoppers who are stopping to look at my Get Rich(er) Quick(er) wealth creation ‘catalog’ but have no intention of ‘buying’ …

This question arose as a result of a recent article on Get Rich Slowly which references the same Warren Buffett quote that that I posted yesterday:

What advice would you give to someone who is not a professional investor? Where should they put their money?
Well, if they’re not going to be an active investor — and very few should try to do that — then they should just stay with index funds. Any low-cost index fund. And they should buy it over time. They’re not going to be able to pick the right price and the right time. What they want to do is avoid the wrong price and wrong stock. You just make sure you own a piece of American business, and you don’t buy all at one time.

Get Rich Slowly then went on to say something very interesting:

Buffett has said this time and time again, which is why I’m baffled when people use Buffett as a reason to not diversify. I am not Warren Buffett. Neither are you. Unless you have Buffett’s combination of patience and intense research, you’re better off putting your money in an index fund. (As one reader recently noted, if you can afford to buy a share of Buffett’s company, Berkshire Hathaway, you’re getting the best of both worlds: a diversified portfolio picked by Warren Buffett!)

… which I also commented on yesterday, but it’s the “one reader” comment at the end, that grabbed me.

If Warren Buffett is indeed the World’s Greatest Investor (he is, without a doubt!), and you want to diversify as he recommends, why not forget about the “low cost index fund” option altogether, and jump straight to the top i.e. into Berkshire Hathaway (the company that Warren controls)?

Why?

Because, Warren didn’t recommend it … he’s too ethical to recommend it … in fact, he even says openly that an investor with $1,000,000 can achieve far better returns than he can nowadays, because Berkshire is just too darn big to move quickly and must invest in such large sums that the number of opportunities out there are much smaller for them than for us ‘little guys’.

Of course, the occasional ‘big opportunity’ opens up for Berkshire Hathaway, because of their $60 Billion ‘war chest’ … in the meantime, that $60 Bill. just sits in the bank barely beating inflation.

Even if Warren were still at his ‘smaller, more nimble’ peak, he still would NOT recommend that you do as “one reader” suggests because:

1. You would be buying just ONE stock … admittedly one that has performed well in the PAST and MAY (or may not) perform well in the future, and

2. You would be buying into only a partially-diversified conglomerate … a ‘piece of Warren’ rather than a ‘piece of [the whole of] America’.

So, if you are on the path to saving rather than investing, do what Warren Buffet himself suggests: stick to low-cost index funds …

… only buy any individual stock – including Berkshire Hathaway – if you are in the business of investing and really know what you are doing.

Don't let all of those stock investment choices fool you …

Posted on May 20, 2008 by Adrian

People new to the world of finance are often blinded by all the options available for investing in the stock market:

– Direct investments in stocks – but which ones? Growth? Value? Invest far and wide? Or only in a few?

– Trading stocks or options – how to value and trade? Fundamental Analysis? Technical Analysis?

– Investing in packaged products – Mutual Funds? Index funds? ETF’s? REIT’s?

I wrote a post recently that summarized these options; here I simply want to add a little more info …

Investopedia Says:
The building of a factory used to produce goods and the investment one makes by going to college or university are both examples of investments in the economic sense.

This means that the true definition of an investment is something that makes a little money now, or more likely a lot of money in the future.

Therefore, while I say that there are three sensible ways to invest in stocks, there are only two investment methods recommended by Warren Buffet:

1. Buy and Hold low cost, diverse Index Funds (check out Vanguard‘s web-site, and others) – this is a long-term, low risk (if your holding periods are 20 – 30 years) strategy that can help you fund a normal retirement.

“By periodically investing in an index fund, for example, the know-nothing investor can actually out-perform most investment professionals” W. E. Buffett – 19932.

2. Invest in a FEW stocks in companies that are (a) undervalued (b) have a large margin of safety (c) that you love and (d) are prepared to HOLD until the rest of the market decides that they love them, too (at which point you can cash out or keep holding for the long/er term). “I never attempt to make money on the stock market … Only buy something that you’d be perfectly happy to hold if the market shut down for 10 years.” W. E. Buffett

Anything else is SPECULATING i.e. the process of selecting investments with higher risk in order to profit from an anticipated price movement.

Investopedia Says:
Speculation should not be considered purely a form of gambling, as speculators do make informed decisions before choosing to acquire the additional risks. Additionally, speculation cannot be categorized as a traditional investment because the acquired risk is higher than average.

Lots of people have made a ton in trading stocks and options (e.g. George Soros, but he was smart enough to know to quit gambling when you are ahead) – the key is to be able to make informed decisions …… my question to you is, how informed are youif you are merely following the herd, reading the popular press, drawing trends on a graph using the same trends that millions of other investors are looking at, doing a rudimentary analysis of the same sets of financials that every analysts worth his salt is poring over?

In short, what is the ‘special sauce’ that you are applying that will let you buck the trend and speculate successfully, like George Soros?

“A public-opinion poll is no substitute for thought … let blockheads read what blockheads wrote.” W. E. Buffett

And, buying most high-cost Mutual Funds or other packaged products is not investing either …

“We believe that according the name ‘investors’ to [people or] institutions that trade actively is like calling someone who repeatedly engages in one-night stands a ‘romantic.’ “ W. E. Buffett

So, take Warren’s advice: unless you have a strong reason to do otherwise, stick to one – or both – of the only two ways of investing in stocks and, over the long-term you are very likely to outperform all but the luckiest of those speculators out there …

What is the best way for a newcomer to get started in investing in stocks?

Posted on May 7, 2008 by Adrian

I just got back from Omaha, where I attended the Annual General Meeting for Berkshire Hathaway – Warren Buffett’s company – so, it’s timely that I remind you there are only a TWO sensible ways to INVEST in stocks – BOTH recommended by Warren Buffet – plus one Speculative way:

1. Buy and Hold low cost, diverse Index Funds (check out Vanguard’s web-site, and others) – this is a long-term, low risk (if your holding periods are 30 years) strategy that can help you fund a normal retirement.

2. Invest in a FEW stocks in companies that are:

(a) undervalued,

(b) have a large margin of safety,

(d) are prepared to HOLD …

… until the rest of the market decides that they love them, too, at which point you cash out and go back to (a).

Anything else is SPECULATING – lots of people have made a ton in trading stocks and options (e.g. George Soros, but he was smart enough to know to quit gambling when you are ahead) – or UNDERACHIEVING such as following the herd and/or buying high-cost Mutual Funds.

You may be one of the few that can succeed in either of these alternative methods … but, please don’t offend the World’s Greatest Investor by calling it INVESTING …

We believe that according the name ‘investors’ to [people or] institutions that trade actively is like calling someone who repeatedly engages in one-night stands a ‘romantic.’ [Warren Buffett]

So, there are only two methods that Warren Buffet would recommend (and one that he clearly would not) – one for the wise and the other for the even wiser – which one would you choose?

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

Well, the ‘news’ of my 7 Millionaires … In Training! ‘experiment’ is finally out … check out my friend, Bill’s post on Money Hacks, then click here to find out more …

Business for sale?

Posted on April 28, 2008 by Adrian

As you know, I’m a member of Networth IQ – and quite an active member, at that! I love reading and answering questions …

[AJC: you’ve probably already seen that from the detailed responses that I try and give commenters on my posts on this blog … try me, if you have a question … I just won’t give direct personal advice, because I am not a qualified professional, but I will give general advice if I think it will benefit all of our readers]

… and this unique site provides a great platform (as does Tickerhound, which provides a great Q&A forum on everything from stocks to real-estate).

For those of you who aren’t members of Networth IQ, here is an exerpt of a great question:

I found a business for sale that has generated the following free cash flows since 1998.

1998 – $3,426.0 Mil
1999 – $3,949.0 Mil
2000 – $4,917.0 Mil
2001 – $7,133.0 Mil
2002 – $6,077.0 Mil
2003 – $8,333.0 Mil
2004 – $8,956.0 Mil
2005 – $9,245.0 Mil
2006 – $11,582.0 Mil
2007 – $12,307.0 Mil

The current owners are asking $183.49 Bil, …. I don’t have $183.49 Bil, but they said that they would sell me a smaller portion of the business if I wanted … Should I buy?

I like this question on two levels:

1. It’s a neat reminder that when we buy stocks, we’re not just buying ‘bits of paper’ … we’re buying a small piece of a real, live business!

And,

2. It gives me an opportunity to show you the sorts of questions that I would ask – and the types of information that I would be looking at before buying into this – or any – business.

According to Warren Buffet (or sources who purport to know how he works) the intrinsic value of a business is in its discounted cashflow.

That is, a business is – or should be – a cash machine … what’s the reason for owning it, if not to get some cash out?

So, in the above example, we should be able to decide if the business is worth $183.49 Billion (not knowing the company in the above excerpt, I am assuming that this number represents the entire current market capitalization of the business) by discounting the cash-flows shown above …

… a quick look at the most recent cash-flow figure shows that it is currently producing $12 Bill. cash per year (probably growing, if history is any guide); that would mean about 15 years to get our money back … yuk.

Now you know why the stock market is generally a fool’s game … I would by far prefer to invest in my own business, or buy a private one at ‘only’ 3 to 5 years free cash-flow (better yet, Net Income), and grow it … then float it myself!

Or, at least sell it to a public company who can immediately ‘claim’ 15 times my Net Profit (hence, give me 7 to 12 times my Net Profit).

But, if we are going to play ‘the stock market’ game, what would we need to know before we can make an informed decision about ‘investing’ in this stock?

Hmmm …

As I pointed out, the free cash-flows on their own say nothing …

For example, I recently sold two similar businesses: one had been going for many years and generated ‘free cash flows’ [now that’s an oxymoron!] of $1 mill. and the other was less than 2 years old and had yet to make a dime.

Yet, I sold them both (separately) for about the same price! So, there must be more to the valuation of a business than Free Cash-flows, right? Absolutely!Let’s start with Return on Invested Capital:

I’d like to know what it has been for this company (and, the industry) over the past 5 years? I’d like to see an improving trend in excess of 15%, please.

Then, is the company growing?

Cash Flow is just one measure (but, what about operating cash-flow … have they made any strategic purchases / major capital expenditures /etc.), so what about the 10 years trends in: Earnings? Book Value? And, what about plain, old Sales?

I’d like to see a history of growth (min. 10%) in all of these …Now, how is there debt situation?

How long will it take them to cover their long-term liabilities from ‘Free Cash Flow’?

I’d like to see no more than 2 to 3 years.

Do the people who run the company own stock? Are they buying or selling?

Tell me about the company: do they have a ‘sustainable competitive advantage’ (what Warren Buffet calls a ‘Moat’ … but, that’s too much water for me!).

Do I believe this company will be around for the next 100 years … do I really want to buy THIS business in THIS industry?

Lastly, if I like the answers to all of the above (unlikely … so far I’ve only liked the answers to similar questions for 7 companies out of the 5,000+ that I can currently buy a ‘piece’ of) …

…. then how CHEAP can I get this thing!?

PS I made the ‘other’ category … waaaayyyyyy down at the bottom of the 150th Carnival of Personal Finance … whoo hoo!

… 7million7years doesn't even know how much is in his Retirement Accounts!

Posted on April 17, 2008 by Adrian

[continued from yesterday]

Now, I’m not particularly proud of this … but, it is true … I have no idea how much is in my retirement accounts; and, I didn’t even bother opening my own 401k account as CEO of my last company!

Why?

Yesterday, I wrote about the costs that can build up in the ‘food chain’ of the investing world, showing that merely accounting for the cost-differential between a typical mutual fund and a typical low-cost index fund can account for 20% of the performance of your entire investment portfolio after just 10 years.

I also, mentioned that I don’t like any of these products (even low-cost index funds, even though I will recommend them to lay-investors), primarily because of lack of control and too much diversification (who ever got rich from diversifying?!) …

So, the second part of this post will, hopefully, tell you why I don’t worry about 401k’s and Roth IRA’s as well as address a question that I recently received from a reader who asked:

Any suggestions on a strategy to use for retirement accounts if you earn beyond the limit for a 401k and Roth Ira? I have no company match for a 401k … get hit hard in taxes and have discovered that there is an income limit to a 401k and Roth IRA. Any suggestions?

Well my simple suggestion is: don’t …

The only time that I invest in a retirement account is when my accountant says:

“AJC, you have too much income flowing in, we had better plonk some into your [401k; Roth IRA, Superannuation Plan, whatever]”.

Yet, using a tax shelter is saving money, and as yesterday’s post showed, even a small difference in cost can add to a big difference in outcome … so, what do I really recommend and why?

If you still have plenty of working years left, I don’t recommend that anybody invests inside their company 401k except to get the ‘company match’ (who can argue with ‘free money’… yee hah!)

I also don’t recommend that anybody – who still has 10+ years of working/investing ‘life’ left – invests inside any tax-vehicles (such as a Roth IRA) etc. UNLESS they can:

(a) Choose their investments, and

(b) leverage those investments.

By choosing, I mean the whole gamut of what we want to be investing in: e.g. businesses, stocks, real-estate, and ???.

Now, in practice, these 401k/IRA’s are limited, so if you don’t intend to invest in some/all of these classes of investment or you have so little money to invest that you can ‘fit’ the whole or part of your intended, say, stock purchase strategy into one of these vehicles then, absolutely … knock yourself out!

Therefore, for most people, it’s still possible that a 401k or Roth IRA can provide an important place in their investing strategy … simply because the amount that they have to invest is so small …

… even so, they should go ahead only if it doesn’t limit the scope of their overall investing strategy, hence returns!

And, we should all know by now that primary importance of your investing strategy should be set on maximizing growth unless:

i) You are within a few years of retirement, when you no longer have time to take risks and recover from mistakes), or

ii) Have such a long-term, low-value outlook that simply saving in a 401k will do the trick (in which case, invest to the max.).

Just remember, this blog and my advice isn’t for everyone … it’s only for those who need to become rich …

… which usually means getting into investments that:

1. You understand and love, and

2. You can grow over time, and

3. You can leverage through borrowings.

If it doesn’t meet all three of these criteria, I simply don’t invest!

Direct investments in businesses and real-estate are the investment choices of the rich because of these three criteria… stocks to a lesser degree (you can only ‘margin borrow’ up to 100% of these, so the amount of ‘leverage’ that you can apply is lower than for, say, real-estate) … and, Managed Funds even less so (you can margin-borrow only on some of these, and only from limited sources).

For me, the limits that tax-effective vehicles place on me, and the maximums that I am allowed to invest in them, automatically reduce these typical ‘tax shelters’ to a very minor position in my portfolio … so minor, that I allow my accountant to manage them for me, totally.

Remember, though, that they only became a minor portion of my portfolio because I followed the advice that I am giving you here when I was still early into my working/investing career!

Now, I hope that (eventually) you, too, will have so much money OUTSIDE your 401K that whatever is INSIDE will be insignificant for you … in the meantime, at least invest for the full company match.

Pretty controversial? Let me know what you think?

7million7years

How to make 7 million in 7 years …

Tag Archives: Stocks