# The bet: Will these average 12% return including dividends in 1 year?



## Realist (16 October 2006)

A bet between Tech/a and myself, a case of beer whether I can hold all of the below until Oct 16th 2007, and make 12% including dividends.

Who wants to bet on who?   

My current portfolio, and the starting prices are as follows:

The ASX All Ords closed at 5276.40 (near all time high)

BHP 27.35
BSL 6.71
CAQ 0.205
CBA 47.00
CBH 0.53
CQT 0.49
DRT 1.675
EVE 0.10
FBU 8.15
FDL 0.015
FGL 6.46
FUN 1.63
HCY 0.015
IAG 5.68
JPR 0.082
MRE 5.31
MTN 0.76
PMH 0.43
PRG 4.43
RIN 14.53
RIO 75.29
USA 0.20
WDC 18.75
WDCNB 18.48


----------



## 2020hindsight (16 October 2006)

*Re: The bet : Will these average 12% return including dividends in 1 year?*



			
				Realist said:
			
		

> ..., a case of beer whether I can hold all of the below until Oct 16th 2007, and make 12% including dividends.




Realist- wont you have to add a "weighting factor" to each ? - something which reflects how many of each you have,  needn't be the correct numbers - but roughly the right ratios. You agree?  (unless of course you say you have approx same total value of each (say $1000)(?) - total $24K?


----------



## tech/a (16 October 2006)

Sent you a private mail.
This is it below.
12% good god Ill bet you can do it..

Anyway sure we can come to an un complicated bit of interest.



> Hahaha your actually a good sport!!
> 
> Tell you what.
> The portfolio being traded on Reefcap (techtrader) is at its all time equity high.So how about my portfolio out trades yours for a carton.
> ...




*Hindsite* youd have to presume equal position sizing.

Current portfolio


----------



## Realist (16 October 2006)

tech/a said:
			
		

> *Hindsite* youd have to presume equal position sizing.




Yep equal position.

Otherwise I'd cheat.    

For instance I'd underweight FGL, MRE, FBU, CBA, and IAG I bought them alot cheaper and would not buy at today's prices...

So 12% is fair considering the ASX is near an all time high and I did not pick the stocks on today's prices I picked most ages ago.


----------



## Realist (16 October 2006)

You holding all of those for 12 months Tech?


----------



## barney (16 October 2006)

I would like to offer my services to "hold" the said carton in "safe" storage until the competition has run its course ............... Of course there will be a small holding fee of say, one stubbie per day ........... now how long did you want the competiton to run??


----------



## tech/a (16 October 2006)

No Im trading them and you can follow on Reefcap.
To be fair you can trade yours as well.
See if you can out perform a mechanical system.
From what I see you think that should be a piece of cake!
Why not start a spread sheet like mine and just update each week.
I post all new trades on Reef when they are taken as with all sells.
Its transparent.

By the way Realist and I seem to have taken this on in the spirit of fun so lets keep it that way.


----------



## StockyBailx (16 October 2006)

Realist said:
			
		

> You holding all of those for 12 months Tech?



You shouldn't cheat, she won't like it. CQT will make you 12% in one week


----------



## swingstar (16 October 2006)

Is that short RIN?


----------



## Julia (16 October 2006)

All the best to both of you.  It will be fascinating to watch.  May we assume monthly updates???

Good on you both for the spirit in which you're obviously engaging in this "competition".

Julia


----------



## 2020hindsight (16 October 2006)

tech/a said:
			
		

> By the way Realist and I seem to have taken this on in the spirit of fun so lets keep it that way.



You've both nailed your colours to the wall - and All Ords also recorded I notice.  Good idea to add that imho.

Put it down to the voice of inexperience.  Rather than bet on 12%, wouldn't you be better to bet that you did say 6% better than the  All Ords?.   I mean, you have to be honest and admit that it's crystal ball stuff to know where that will go surely (and dont call me Shirley).  Seriously Up? Seriously Down? Sideways?  If there's some trouble in the world - or the economy goes belly up etc.  China runs out of puff.   Ahhh to hell with it - you blokes have your fun - but imho there's a fair share of "imponderables" - (system or no system). 

PS good luck to both of you - and to everyone here - and especially to me


----------



## barney (16 October 2006)

Julia said:
			
		

> All the best to both of you.  It will be fascinating to watch.  May we assume monthly updates???
> 
> Good on you both for the spirit in which you're obviously engaging in this "competition".
> 
> Julia




Yeah the spirit is great, but do I get to hold the carton???  :bier: Gotta get our priorities right


----------



## Realist (16 October 2006)

tech/a said:
			
		

> No Im trading them and you can follow on Reefcap.
> To be fair you can trade yours as well.
> See if you can out perform a mechanical system.
> From what I see you think that should be a piece of cake!
> ...




Fine, but please post your trades here as well if you can remember, so we can all follow - most don't have access to Reefcap.

I'll hold all of my shares for 1 year. No trading whatsoever by me. And that means I pay no tax whatsoever.

I also would like free options included if they are issued.  JPR, USA etc...  

And assume I reinvest all dividends, as I always do...


----------



## nizar (16 October 2006)

Realist said:
			
		

> Fine, but please post your trades here as well if you can remember, so we can all follow - most don't have access to Reefcap.
> 
> I'll hold all of my shares for 1 year. No trading whatsoever by me. And that means I pay no tax whatsoever.
> 
> ...





Realist
12% isnt that hard - yet u seem to already be nervous, what happened to all that confidence u were oozing? 
U seem to have a solid portfolio - but what happened to ZFX? 
I see CBH and EVE as the dark horses - potential multibaggers there IMO


----------



## Realist (16 October 2006)

nizar said:
			
		

> Realist
> 12% isnt that hard - yet u seem to already be nervous, what happened to all that confidence u were oozing?




Depends doesn't it?   12% each year after all expenses and taxes are taken into account is a rather good result. It'd turn $100K into $1M in 20 years...

Remember I get FGL, MRE etc. at today's prices - I bought them when they were much cheaper. They are now not undervalued, and the ASX is near an all time high.  I believe 12% is a good result considering I have to use todays prices.



> U seem to have a solid portfolio - but what happened to ZFX?




Never bought it, was talking about it, pondering, waiting, worried about mine life, try to get in on a dip, bahhhhh I missed it!!   



> I see CBH and EVE as the dark horses - potential multibaggers there IMO




Yeah but CQT may just fly tomorrow.
USA will fly Wednesday.
PMH will fly sometime. (I hope)

JPR and FDL are cheap duds... with potential to at least get back to where they were 3 months ago.

Most of the others pay good dividends and shouldn't let me down.

The best way to get 12% return on average is to avoid losses, collect some dividends and have a couple of multibaggers.


----------



## tech/a (17 October 2006)

Stop whinging Realist.
My portfolio is very mature----some have been held for years.

Dont worry about percentages,which portfolio will return best results over the next 12 mths.
"Techtrader" or "Fundamental Realism"

Both have to trade or hold the same market.

Realist you must alter your veiws on TAX.
If you wish to use your money at sometime youll have to take the tax hit.
What you save is minimal.
Better to tack the tax today re invest it in other opportunities and pay the tax in 12 or more months.


----------



## Realist (17 October 2006)

tech/a said:
			
		

> Both have to trade or hold the same market.
> 
> Realist you must alter your veiws on TAX.
> If you wish to use your money at sometime youll have to take the tax hit.
> What you save is minimal.




If you trade, and I hold, I suspect you will may slightly before tax, and I'll win after tax as I pay none.

50% tax saving is not minimal, 50% is crippling!

Tax is not a game, people move to Singapore or Bermuda purely for tax reasons, it needs to be reduced at all costs.


----------



## tech/a (17 October 2006)

So you never realise profit?
So you can never use it.
You avoid tax but never get 75 or 50% of your winnings.

Remind me never to seek investment advice from you!


----------



## Realist (17 October 2006)

I let what I theoretically owe in tax compound for me not for the government.


----------



## tech/a (17 October 2006)

Your logic is far from "Vulcan".

At some point you have to pay tax to take your profit whatever that is and whenever that maybe.
Other than waiting 12 mths your saving zero.
Particularly if your holding decreases in value after the 12 mth holding period.

Could I suggest "An introduction to Accountancy practices 101"

But hey if delusion is your reality then delude on.


----------



## Realist (17 October 2006)

If Graham recommends it, Buffet does it, and many have followed it, it is good enough for me.

I bought FGL, WDC, CBA, IAG, RIN, etc. etc. all with the knowledge I will not need to sell them, the dividends will get bigger and I wont pay tax!!

$100 at 20% profit per year but 50% tax each year for 5 years becomes.

$100
$110 
$121
$132
$145 (take out the extra brokerage and you've made little)

$100 at 20% profit and no tax until you sell 5 years later becomes

$100
$120
$144
$173
$207 (less 25% tax on $107) = $180

Still you know best, Buffet is obviously wrong


----------



## Realist (17 October 2006)

Any sells today Tech/a?

30 minutes in, and I notice most of your stocks are red.    





Just winding you up, good luck, I hope we both make a mint!


----------



## Nicks (17 October 2006)

Realist said:
			
		

> If you trade, and I hold, I suspect you will may slightly before tax, and I'll win after tax as I pay none.




I thought you get a 50% discount on CGT if you hold for more than 12 months, but you still have tax?


----------



## Realist (17 October 2006)

Nicks said:
			
		

> I thought you get a 50% discount on CGT if you hold for more than 12 months, but you still have tax?




Correct, but if the competition is for 1 year and I do not sell in that year, I do not owe tax in that year - I pay zero tax, yet every time Tech/a sells he pays 50% tax.

Semantics sure.

But you need to bear in mind I consider this very carefully before buying any share, and especially before selling.  I bought most of my stocks for dividends and because I aim to hold them for many years.

Tech/a bought most of his stocks (I am assuming) for short term profits.

It is a marathon runner agaisnt a sprinter.  He may beat me over the first few years but once compouding kicks in I will win.


----------



## barney (17 October 2006)

Hey Realist and Tech, you need not take anything I say seriously (but you can if you like)  If the competition is to be totally fair and "judgeable" by your peers/admirers (yeah OK I think your'e both smart ... what can I say!!) ,  Shouldn't you both a) set a start date ......... b) Paper trade your selections for the period in question ( and post results) so that a "true judgement" can be considered over the time in question .............. Using "positions" already in play is like starting a race while the other guy is in the dunny... so to speak (whichever guy that may be )  ...... Hope that makes sense ....It does to me, but I've been subject to loud music for much of my life    ................... For the comp to work, it must start from a clean slate!!!!

PS I STILL want to hold the carton (less tax) ........ Have I made that clear yet!!!  Good onya both, Barney.  (even Barney has some good ideas  at times..... sometimes I impress myself ............mmm .......... gotta cook tea for my wife ........... she is not happy with the time I spend on the computer  

PPS Lets Assume $100,000 starting bank each, and see who finishes best in the period of time agreed on ....... ???? Hows that sound?


----------



## Realist (17 October 2006)

Hi Barney, the starting date was yesterday.

We've listed our shares and starting prices already.

I probably wont sell any, Tech will trade a few. We'll then argue over tax as I wont have any and he will.   

There'll probably be no clear winner.

Still it'll be interesting and a bit of fun!


----------



## tech/a (17 October 2006)

> There'll probably be no clear winner.




Of course there will!!

Ill ignore your tax if you ignore mine.
If you cant take your profit at sometime then when is it a profit?

Frankly if you never sell them and never get taxed then have you made a profit?---not according to the tax department.

Simply say at the end of the period (12 mths) profit from BOTH methods is taken.Wether its nett or gross profit who cares.

But if you want me to give you a 50% head start--thats a bit rich.


----------



## nizar (17 October 2006)

Realist said:
			
		

> Correct, but if the competition is for 1 year and I do not sell in that year, I do not owe tax in that year - I pay zero tax, yet every time Tech/a sells he pays 50% tax.




Damn that will be so embarrassing if u STILL lose


----------



## Realist (17 October 2006)

nizar said:
			
		

> Damn that will be so embarrassing if u STILL lose




Hahaha.

You need to bear in mind I've bought most of my shares with longterm goals in mind.

Of course I do not expect Fosters, IAG, CBA, Fletcher Building, Westfield etc. to rocket up soon and make me megabucks.

Infact Fosters is already slightly overvalued because of takeover rumours - but I'll still hold it for the yield - it may go down a little this year but I wont sell it!

But I can safely hold those shares for many many years and get solid but small price increases and nice dividends and PAY NO TAX!!!

One of my key aims when purchasing a stock is to hold it longterm to reduce tax, Tech doesn't do that - fair enough.

But when comparing my results to his you need to bear in mind he pays alot of brokerage, subscriptions to information, subscriptions to trading tools, and tax - I pay none of those at all.

And at the end of the day it is who makes the most after all expenses are taken into account isn't it?

If you disagree then go get a managed fund with a margin loan and tell me how well you are doing (after all expenses) !


----------



## bowser (17 October 2006)

Good work guys, the post will be interesting to watch. 

It just goes to show that when it comes to trading you need to find a system that suits your personality.

Good luck!


----------



## nizar (17 October 2006)

Realist said:
			
		

> If you disagree then go get a managed fund with a margin loan and tell me how well you are doing (after all expenses) !




I made 70%nett last year from Colonial First State Geared Australian Share Fund (i moved in and out a fair bit, but no entry or exit fees were incurred)


----------



## barney (17 October 2006)

Realist said:
			
		

> Hi Barney, the starting date was yesterday.
> 
> We've listed our shares and starting prices already.
> 
> ...




Bugga, and I thought I was on to a good idea ............. I still think the comp should have been started from a clean slate!! .............. its not too late to start fresh you guys .... worth considering ....... (reckon I've missed holding the "carton" for sure now    ................. double bugga!!


----------



## Duckman#72 (17 October 2006)

Realist said:
			
		

> But I can safely hold those shares for many many years and get small price increases and PAY NO TAX!!!
> 
> One of my key aims when purchasing a stock is to hold it longterm to reduce tax.




I have to agree with Tech on this Realist. You are too driven by tax. 

I would have thought that the investment decision comes first, followed by the execution, and if all goes to plan - followed by the profits(hopefully). You can then plan your tax strategy.

If you have a "buy and hold" strategy - great but don't sell it to others on the basis that you are doing it for tax. After you hold for 12 months you are not saving yourself anything. Hold a share for another 10 years if you like but you won't save yourself any additional tax.  

Doesn't your strategy stop you from selling underperforming shares? 

You will make more money working on maximising your profits - rather than minimising your tax. 

Duckman


----------



## tech/a (17 October 2006)

> You will make more money working on maximising your profits - rather than minimising your tax.




He may never be rich but hell he'll never pay tax!

Key here is minimising not AVOIDING tax.

How do you feel about death?
Got any hints on that?
Seems youve avoided the first Trueism!


----------



## Duckman#72 (17 October 2006)

tech/a said:
			
		

> He may never be rich but hell he'll never pay tax!
> 
> Key here is minimising not AVOIDING tax.
> 
> ...




Yes you are right Tech - I stand by my first comment but it sounds much better by saying "You will make more money by working on maximising your profits - than you will by *avoiding* tax". Becasue that is what he is doing.


----------



## clowboy (17 October 2006)

Well hells bells tech,

Lets make a list shall we,

Computer - depreciatable
Internet - tax deduction (scaled)
Phone - tax ded (???)
Rent/mortage - tax deduction 


And the list goes on and on and on, don't forget to include all them in your results.

Also how does Tech pay 50% tax? the most he can pay as a trader is 47% at the top tax bracket


----------



## Realist (17 October 2006)

Duckman#72 said:
			
		

> If you have a "buy and hold" strategy - great but don't sell it to others on the basis that you are doing it for tax. After you hold for 12 months you are not saving yourself anything. Hold a share for another 10 years if you like but you won't save yourself any additional tax.




You do actually.

Make 20% after each year and sell and you end up with 15% a year.

Don't sell and let it compond and you are way ahead after 10 years.

What in theory you owe in tax compounds for you, not the government.   


20% returns compounding
Pay 25% tax :no tax

100      100
115      120
132      144
152      173
175      207
201      248
231      299


----------



## Realist (17 October 2006)

tech/a said:
			
		

> How do you feel about death?
> Got any hints on that?




Yeah, my tip is to avoid death for as long as you can.

Much like I try to avoid tax.

The longer you can avoid them the better off you are!!


----------



## Realist (17 October 2006)

Duckman#72 said:
			
		

> Doesn't your strategy stop you from selling underperforming shares?




YES.

It also stops me from selling overperforming shares (MRE for instance).

Others will beat me in the short term, but my low brokerage, no subscription fees, no trading tool fees, and no tax will mean I win in the end.


----------



## barney (17 October 2006)

Realist said:
			
		

> Yeah, my tip is to avoid death for as long as you can.
> 
> Much like I try to avoid tax.
> 
> The longer you can avoid them the better off you are!!





Avoid death .................. I wonder if anyone will come up with an argument against that idea


----------



## Realist (17 October 2006)

Would you guys rather pay tax as you earn money?  Or pay it at the end of the year in one lump sum like some Asian countries do?

Why does the Aussie goverment use PAYE?

It uses it so it gets the tax now!! Before inflation diminishes it, and so it can invest it and you can't.

Were we all to pay tax a year later than it was due we could invest what we owed and make money while avoiding the impact of inflation right?  

The longer you leave paying tax the better off you are!

Get it?


----------



## barney (17 October 2006)

I have a couple of friends who are much older than me who simply live off their dividends year after year .............. Personally I enjoy the cut and thrust of the market (trading in  and out etc ..... I am a bit impatient though) , but I repect how much patience  and discipline Realist (and my  friends) have, to sit back and "watch" without being tempted to sell a share out just because it is dropping in the short term. Everyone has a different approach, and that has to be a good thing. Cheers Barney.


----------



## barney (24 October 2006)

Its been a week ........... How often do we get updates from you guys    (Just kidding ..... making sure the thread remains active .........)


----------



## tech/a (24 October 2006)

Well My portfolio up 2.29% last week.

Started with $350K week 1 week 2 $358K.

Havent worked out what Realist did.
Results can be viewed weekly here.

http://lightning.he.net/cgi-bin/suid/~reefcap/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=74;t=000029;p=3

At this rate should have this wrapped up in 6 weeks!! (hahaha only kidding).


----------



## BentRod (24 October 2006)

Is anyone taking side bets on this one?? 

The farm on Tech! :


----------



## Buster (24 October 2006)

Realist said:
			
		

> The longer you leave paying tax the better off you are!
> 
> Get it?



Hey Boys,

It seems that everyone is getting hung up on the Tax issue.. I thought that the aim was to increase your current wealth, utilising the stocks listed and by the trading method selected, by twelve percent. Regardless of tax..  

Techs method (if he buys and sells) will obviously attract tax, Realists (if he simply holds) will not.. who will increase thier wealth by the greater amount after the twelve month period?? Isn't that the aim of the comp??

I'll watch with interest no matter what, so go to it boys.. 

Regards,

Buster


----------



## Buster (24 October 2006)

Realist said:
			
		

> And at the end of the day it is who makes the most after all expenses are taken into account isn't it?



Ahh..

My point exactly.. disregard my previous post.. 

Regards,

Buster.


----------



## Realist (25 October 2006)

I'm down 0.24%.

Lost on CQT, CAQ, JPR, FDL, RIN and HCY, the rest are okay or up...

Early days....

I count my starting prices about 4 days after Tech does though, so for instance he has MRE for $4.98 I have MRE at $5.31 - so infact I have lost money on it in this comp, despite making 120% already in just 4 months.

Still as I said early days, judging a comp on 1 week is silly.  If Zinc and Nickel prices drop Tech will lose out..  I'm more diversified but more reliant on uranium and copper.


----------



## maffu (25 October 2006)

Realist, how old are you, and when do you plan to sell some shares to use the money?
Is your investment strategy to amass a fortune for your children/family to inherit? Or will you perhaps sell and have a fun retirement at the age of 65 (if you live that long)


----------



## Realist (25 October 2006)

maffu said:
			
		

> Realist, how old are you, and when do you plan to sell some shares to use the money?
> Is your investment strategy to amass a fortune for your children/family to inherit? Or will you perhaps sell and have a fun retirement at the age of 65 (if you live that long)




Early 30's..

I sell some "trading" shares as I see fit, although I am always hesitant to sell, and always consider tax implications and aim to hold bluechips like Westfiled, Fosters, Commonwealth Bank etc. for as long as possible.

My strategy is to be rich, and spend all the money on booze and broads, it wont happen overnight, but it will happen!!

I'll retire young, live off dividends...  : 

Do you think you can get rich quick on the stockmarket?


----------



## tech/a (25 October 2006)

> I count my starting prices about 4 days after Tech does though, so for instance he has MRE for $4.98 I have MRE at $5.31 - so infact I have lost money on it in this comp, despite making 120% already in just 4 months.




Hell I dont mind include MRE and backdate 4 mths ago.

4 mths ago my portfolio was $299,000 today $358,000 thats an increase in 4 mths of 19.7%.(Do I win?)

Realist its my veiw that your portfolio is far to diversified and as such will perform pretty much to the market.But hey thats from someone who "doesnt know how to trade"


----------



## Realist (25 October 2006)

tech/a said:
			
		

> Hell I dont mind include MRE and backdate 4 mths ago.
> 
> 4 mths ago my portfolio was $299,000 today $358,000 thats an increase in 4 mths of 19.7%.(Do I win?)




No, cause I know how much you pay in fees, tax, brokerage, and subscriptions.    




> Realist its my veiw that your portfolio is far to diversified and as such will perform pretty much to the market.But hey thats from someone who "doesnt know how to trade




Exactly, the market overtime always goes up - I'm happy to follow it.  If the market goes up a measley 7% and I get 5% dividends there is 12% there!!


----------



## Shane Baker (25 October 2006)

This simple spreadsheet shows the effect of deferring paying tax on returns. There are three calculations; 

1.the first shows a strategy of borrowing the funds to pay the tax owed which is assumed to be 30%. The balance of the account is always topped up via a margin loan to the end of year balance prior to the tax being paid. The interest on the loan is paid as we go, and the loan funds repaid at the end of the term.

2. The second shows the effect on the same returns by paying the tax from the account balanceas it is due.

3. The third shows the effect of a buy and hold system with less returns than the trading account. Instead of assuming 25% a we allocated 18% pa.The tax paid is assumed to be 15% on all capital gains.

Interesting results and food for thought.Always do your own research. If there are any error I apologise in advance.   

Cheers

Shane


----------



## tech/a (25 October 2006)

*Thanks Shane.*

Seems to have shot the tax arguement.

Realist I can count my Dividends as well?
They arent even included in the table!!

Your nett return you keep spuiking on about keeps deminishing.
From 12% to 7% plus dividends.

How about we settle for simply a profit.
I doubt you get that.

Frankly this is a pathetic joke.
Anyone can pick a portfolio of X shares and sit on them indefinately.

Anyway something may be learnt from it.


----------



## Realist (25 October 2006)

tech/a said:
			
		

> Realist I can count my Dividends as well?
> They arent even included in the table!!




Yes of course, you should always include dividends!

You don't think I bought CBA, IAG, FGL, WDC and others in the hope of excellent capital returns do you?  Of course not, I bought them for their dividends!!  Dividends must always be counted.



> Anyone can pick a portfolio of X shares and sit on them indefinately.




Actually virtually no-one can, sounds silly but people are far too impatient and look for quick fixes.

Get rich quick schemes sell far better than "The Intelligent Investor".

If you eat healthy and exercise you will lose weight - but every womens magazine has a new fad diet each week. 

People have a perverse way to make something easy seem difficult.

Had you bought into Westfield, BHP, Fosters, and CBA 10 years ago and just held you'd have made more than every single trader here! (don't forget to include dividends). And that aint by picking unknowns and getting lucky - that is just by buying already large succesfull companies.


----------



## Realist (25 October 2006)

Shane Baker said:
			
		

> 1.the first shows a strategy of borrowing the funds to pay the tax owed which is assumed to be 30%.




Why is tax 30%?

It is 50% from what I know if you hold less than a year.

Your chart is not that useful sorry, you need to remember traders pay alot more in brokerage, often trading software fees and subscriptions, and often get no dividends, also they often make losses, 25% per year is not a return traders consistently get on all their capital - otherwise there would be many billionainre traders and there certainly aint!

Investors get good dividends and pay no expenses, compounding works for them and they rarely if ever make losses because dividends alone make a bad year adequate.


----------



## tech/a (25 October 2006)

Realist said:
			
		

> Yes of course, you should always include dividends!
> 
> 
> 
> Actually virtually no-one can, sounds silly but people are far too impatient and look for quick fixes.




I agree here.



> Get rich quick schemes sell far better than "The Intelligent Investor".




Hell would you say they perform better than most???I mean "The Intelligent Investor".

Infact from those Ive seen I would say that most stock picking newsletter types are no better than the fish oil salesmen.




> If you eat healthy and exercise you will lose weight - but every womens magazine has a new fad diet each week.
> 
> *People have a perverse way to make something easy seem difficult*.




Its human nature to think that the more complex something is the more valuable and successful it must be. I definately agree with your statement.



> Had you bought into Westfield, BHP, Fosters, and CBA 10 years ago and just held you'd have made more than every single trader here! (don't forget to include dividends). And that aint by picking unknowns and getting lucky - that is just by buying already large succesfull companies.





We are actually on the same page. Most wish to trade short term with pecieved massive gains. This is why 95% fail. Its a bugger of a way to trade,stressfull,time consuming and anything but simple.
Yes it can be done ,Ive traded both ways,much preferring the portfolio method.
The only way Id trade serious capital.Unfortunatley most beginners dont have serious capital.


----------



## Realist (25 October 2006)

When I say the Intelligent Investor - I mean Ben Graham's book, not the "trading newsletter".

That book for $45 is far better than any and every get rich quick scheme obviously. Yet it does not sell well and get rich quick schemes do.


----------



## Shane Baker (25 October 2006)

Realist

Why 30% ....because it depends upon the structure under which you choose to grow your capital. A company pays 30%...a trust may pay much less.

25% is acheivable as an CAGR. Have a look at Ed Seykota returns here www.iasg.com\  He has acheived 26% return CAGR since 1987.

There are 47 funds with a CAGR of greater than 25% since inception. Some have been around for a long time.

Tech has shown on here and ReefCap how a very simple system (often the best IMO) can acheive outstanding returns.

I may have missed it but you didn't argue the point about 18% CAGR for the buy and hold strategy or its generous 15% tax rate.

Good luck with the bet. It looks like you'll need it   

Cheers

Shane


----------



## nizar (25 October 2006)

tech/a said:
			
		

> Unfortunatley most beginners dont have serious capital.




And therein lies the problem.
The attraction of the stockmarket lies in T+3. They say u need money to make money which is great after your established. But when you're just starting out, its good to know u can have a few Gs in the bank and be trading 25 or 30k parcels. A mate of mine new to this whole thing was ecstatic a couple of days ago, when he, usually a small player, did a quick intraday trade (25k), and made $2.5k in a few hours. The next day he lost about $2k. Which highlighted the potential for those quick trades. And also of course highlighted the potential for serious damage if u dont control your losses ie. use stops.

But yeh, well for me, im gonna be trying to do some intraday trading when i have the time to be at the PC. Itll be nice to make some money to supplement my long term zinc and uranium holds.


----------



## nizar (25 October 2006)

Realist said:
			
		

> When I say the Intelligent Investor - I mean Ben Graham's book, not the "trading newsletter".
> 
> That book for $45 is far better than any and every get rich quick scheme obviously. Yet it does not sell well and get rich quick schemes do.




Agree. I rate it highly.


----------



## Realist (25 October 2006)

Shane Baker said:
			
		

> I may have missed it but you didn't argue the point about 18% CAGR for the buy and hold strategy or its generous 15% tax rate.




18% is a little high for a buy and hold investor to get consistently every year. 12% is a good return.

However after 10 years the tax may still infact be zero.

If you do not sell you do not pay tax!!


----------



## Realist (25 October 2006)

Shane Baker said:
			
		

> 25% is acheivable as an CAGR. Have a look at Ed Seykota returns here www.iasg.com\  He has acheived 26% return CAGR since 1987.
> 
> There are 47 funds with a CAGR of greater than 25% since inception. Some have been around for a long time.




Well you are not talking about profit after all expenses, fees, brokerage, subscriptions and taxes are included.

And you are not talking about profit on all your capital reinvested and compounding.

I am!


----------



## professor_frink (25 October 2006)

> 25% per year is not a return traders consistently get on all their capital - otherwise there would be many billionainre traders and there certainly aint!



You're right, there aren't many Billionaire traders, but there are some. Just like there aren't many Billionaire Buffet/Graham disciples, but there could be some of those too.

Have a look at this story about Steve Cohen. 
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/03_29/b3842001_mz001.htm


----------



## Seneca60BC (25 October 2006)

professor_frink said:
			
		

> You're right, there aren't many Billionaire traders, but there are some. Just like there aren't many Billionaire Buffet/Graham disciples, but there could be some of those too.
> 
> Have a look at this story about Steve Cohen.
> http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/03_29/b3842001_mz001.htm




If your a genius then you can make billions too - are you professor?


----------



## tech/a (25 October 2006)

Dont have to be a genius just ask the guys who got *YOU TUBE* up and running!


----------



## professor_frink (25 October 2006)

Seneca60BC said:
			
		

> If your a genius then you can make billions too - are you professor?



Am I a genius or a billionaire? I'm not quite sure which your asking!

I suppose it doesn't matter, because the answer is NO to both


----------



## Shane Baker (25 October 2006)

*And you are not talking about profit on all your capital reinvested and compounding.*

It is scary to see someone who advocates  analysis using fundamentals with such a poor working knowledge of maths. CAGR is just that compound...annual....growth....return.....  

The yearly return based on capital plus all profits invested. So the spreadsheets showed the CAGR of 25% and 18% respectively.

Returns are based on brokerage/fees etc etc being taken out prior to the calculation.

I would suggest you construct your own spreadsheet showing a borrowing of say 20% of capital base each year for reinvestment. As long as you deduct the interest costs at the start of the year you may be very pleasantly surprised at the results even after repayment of the loan. Run the spreadsheet for 35 years given your age......and compare to the base results of compounding. It will be illuminating


----------



## Realist (25 October 2006)

Shane Baker said:
			
		

> *And you are not talking about profit on all your capital reinvested and compounding.*
> 
> It is scary to see someone who advocates  analysis using fundamentals with such a poor working knowledge of maths. CAGR is just that compound...annual....growth....return.....




Oh dear!     

Shane, if you expect to get 25% returns compounding on all your capital each year after all taxes and fees, then good on ya!!

You'll be a multi-billionaire in no time.


----------



## Shane Baker (25 October 2006)

Realist,
It is fruitless to attempt to have an intellectual discourse with one so obviously at a disadvantage such as yourself.   

I never mentioned including taxes in the CAGR. Sadly I cannot expect you to even bother having a close look at the spreadsheet data...changing some values and seeing the effect for yourself. Hopefully it has helped someone understand that there are ways to improve your returns after tax. 

Cheers

Shane


----------



## Realist (25 October 2006)

I read the spreadsheet but it made no sense to me. The tax rates are wrong for personal traders, the returns are too high. It is of no use. 

And too assume traders earn a far higher return than investors is a generalisation that is somewhat unfair, traders make more losses and get stopped out of trades, pay alot of brokerage, get slippage on both buys and sells and rarely get dividends. Investors have none of these problems.

Alot of experienced traders admit 90% of all traders lose money, and most buy and hold investors make money.  If you compare the average investor to the average trader the investor gets a higher return and pays less fees and taxes no doubt about it.  Only an excellent trader will get good results.

Besides even if your spreadsheet was correct you'd just be telling me something I already know about tax.


----------



## Realist (25 October 2006)

Marathon's little run today means I am up 1.3% so far....

CBH is also been a shining star.

However CQT is killing me, as is JPR..


----------



## Sir Burr (25 October 2006)

Shane Baker said:
			
		

> This simple spreadsheet shows the effect of deferring paying tax on returns.



Hi Michael,

I've been paying my tax with a LOC for a number of years. I've never actually done any calculations on doing this so your spreadsheet is VERY interesting, thankyou.

I've a second job (so can do this): seems pyramiding capital, adding dividends and paying tax via LOC is a good way to accumulate!  

SB

Edit: BTW the tax rate on the spreadsheet being 30% and 15% is fine. Increasing BOTH rates, returns will match.
Also, returns as a trader have been higher. Longer term may be different but think an average of 25% is achievable.


----------



## clowboy (25 October 2006)

12% PA for a buy and hold stratergy of blue chips (dividends reinvested) is lame

more like 20%+

all the stocks you use as examples have returned way over 12%

IE CBA WDC FGL


----------



## Realist (25 October 2006)

clowboy said:
			
		

> 12% PA for a buy and hold stratergy of blue chips (dividends reinvested) is lame
> 
> more like 20%+
> 
> ...




Work it out mate $100,000 at 20% for 30 years is $20 Million Dollars.

Do your maths again!!


----------



## clowboy (25 October 2006)

Realist,

You make me laugh.

There was no maths involved.

I don't know about FGL and cant really be bothered looking it up but CBA and WDC have not been around for 30 yrs. (yes WDC was a merger).

CBA listed in 1991.

Etrade only has 10yr price history and it shows a price of under $12 10 years ago to a price above $46 currently which is around 16% (excluding div's)  including div's it is above 20%.  Granted FGL and WDC are not quite the same track record.

If you put $100k into the three stocks you mentioned and reinvested div's for the next 30 years, if past returns are indictive of future returns then yes it would be worth an awful lot

And BTW 20% compunded over 30 yrs is closer to 24 mill.


----------



## Realist (26 October 2006)

clowboy said:
			
		

> If you put $100k into the three stocks you mentioned and reinvested div's for the next 30 years, if past returns are indictive of future returns then yes it would be worth an awful lot




I agree. And that is roughly what I am doing...  :


----------



## tech/a (26 October 2006)

Get a grip.

Your supposedly trading about 20 stocks at the one time.All of them winners except for those that it seems have popped up as losers which you hold, and hold,and hold.
Youve used an example of $100K compounded over 30 yrs.
You dont have enough for a deposit on a house.
At 100K per share you must have a capital base of $2 million.

What the hell is it Realist make up your mind how the hell do you trade or are you still buggerising around and not so sure.

Full of theories my man but all over the place like a bull in a China shop.

If it works this week your doing it,if it doesnt on with the next theory which before you know it youve been doing for years.

Just pick something and trade it.


----------



## Realist (26 October 2006)

I sold IAG today at 5.50, and sold some PMH at .46.

Need the money, off to Europe for a month next week.

I still hold PMH - just reduced my holding.

IAG is not paying a dividend for 6 months and is higher than what I bought it for. I need the money so I sold. I made quite a bit on it, but mainly just from dividends. They've paid 3 dividends this year which is good.

Tech the only losers I have are FDL and JPR. I'm down $1400 on them, all the others are winners.

MTN, CBH and USA have made me alot in the past week.   :


----------



## Realist (26 October 2006)

tech/a said:
			
		

> Full of theories my man but all over the place like a bull in a China shop.




I have investments (companies that make profits and pay dividends), shares I am trading (not charting and not day trading, merely shares I see potential in that may not make profits currently or pay dividends), and I have some Nasdaq shares.

Simple as that.

I diversify widely - hence in your eyes all over the place.

Why not have most in investements and some trading (gambling).

It seems to me you do something similar - QBE, ASX, BIL etc. are investments, KZL is a trade.

Infact it seems to me that you've entered boring investments in this comp.   Yet you harp on about charting.. Seems you know better


----------



## tech/a (26 October 2006)

Realist said:
			
		

> I have investments (companies that make profits and pay dividends), shares I am trading (not charting and not day trading, merely shares I see potential in that may not make profits currently or pay dividends), and I have some Nasdaq shares.
> 
> Simple as that.
> 
> I diversify widely - hence in your eyes all over the place.




Fine.
Just with everything you have on the go I cant see how you can fund it.
Investments,Trading,Nasdaq,from your posts youd need 500K---anyway doesnt matter.



> Why not have most in investements and some trading (gambling).




I never gamble when trading.



> It seems to me you do something similar - QBE, ASX, BIL etc. are investments, KZL is a trade.
> 
> Infact it seems to me that you've entered boring investments in this comp.




All are part of the mechanical/systematic trading method which has been running for 4 yrs. seeing you wanted to do this for 12 mths and its running already and will be in 12 mths time,and being the main way i invest in the market thats why I chose it---minimum effort. Boring trading is successful trading!



> Yet you harp on about charting.. Seems you know better




Im a technical trader I have very little interest in fundamentals. Without entering into the fundamental technical arguement---MY REASONS for trading technically is that finding the truth in Company Valuation is often not only difficult BUT percieved vastly differently by the majority of the market.

Price action or Charting is a reflection of market perception right now.Again on a personal level,I dont like ifs and could be's,price action wll tell me if Im right or wrong--AT THE TIME.

Charting is for me and others like me is necessary to form the basis of a trading methodology which we can measure and if profitable adopt---complete with a blueprint of what to expect from our trading methodology---from here we can with confidence trade even leveraged capital with confidence within those known parameters---if our results ever fall outside these "knowns" then we have a signal to STOP and re evaluate.


While only a *part* of the Business it is the "Product" so to speak!
Around which you can build a profitable business.

Trading technically or developing a methodology around tech analysis requires a sound knowledge.
There are many ways to deploy and use T/A from Day trading to Weekly systems trades.


----------



## Realist (26 October 2006)

> Im a technical trader I have very little interest in fundamentals.




Well I can not see how from charting you ended up with so many near monopolies like ASX, AUN, BIL, etc. Fundamentally they are the best to choose.

Also your other shares tend to have a low PER or a low forecasted PER.

Quite simply most of your shares are fundamentally very good.  I can not see how you chose those from charting alone, yet you include no companies that have with excellent charts such as CBH with no financial fundamentals.

You could have easily chosen your portfolio based on fundamentals alone.

Oh well...


----------



## tech/a (26 October 2006)

Where as Techtrader would have picked very few of yours.

The two methods of trading are vastly different.---Vastly.


----------



## tech/a (27 October 2006)

Start portfolio balance $350316
Close of trade week 2 $373248.

So far 6.55% gain in 2 weeks.


----------



## nizar (27 October 2006)

tech/a,

nice KZL and ZFX those zincers will take you far.
i guess the charts speak for themselves.


----------



## Realist (27 October 2006)

tech/a said:
			
		

> Start portfolio balance $350316
> Close of trade week 2 $373248.
> 
> So far 6.55% gain in 2 weeks.




Assuming equal positioning, I make it 3.5% Tech ??     

Code	Buy	Current	Percentage
ARG	7.39	7.7	4.19%
ASX	34.3	36.05	5.10%
AUN	1.31	1.205	-8.02%
BIL	12.8	12.68	-0.94%
IGO	4.98	5.01	0.60%
IVC	5.58	5.3	-5.02%
KZL	5.95	7.21	21.18%
MRE	4.98	5.2	4.42%
QBE	24.59	24.42	-0.69%
TRS	7.95	8.4	5.66%
ZFX	13.08	14.65	12.00%
		TOTAL	3.50%


----------



## nizar (27 October 2006)

Realist said:
			
		

> yet you include no companies that have with excellent charts such as CBH with no financial fundamentals.




A 500m market cap company poised to earn NPAT 100m for FY2007 and a great pipeline of growth seems like pretty good fundamentals to me.

In fact i was buying it before the chart looked excellent.


----------



## Realist (27 October 2006)

I'm up 1.4%

RIN gave me a nice rise today.

Down heavily on JPR and CQT so far though.  Up 27% on CBH.


----------



## Realist (27 October 2006)

nizar said:
			
		

> A 500m market cap company poised to earn NPAT 100m for FY2007 and a great pipeline of growth seems like pretty good fundamentals to me.
> 
> In fact i was buying it before the chart looked excellent.




Poised to earn....

I own CBH and I agree it is great, I'm nearly up 100% on it, but it has yet to make a profit, that is all I was saying.


----------



## Realist (27 October 2006)

When or if Zinc prices fall I'll overtake Tech...


----------



## tech/a (27 October 2006)

Start portfolio balance $350316
Close of trade week 2 $373248.

$350316 x 1.0655 = you do the math.

If the Dow crashes 500 points.
If,could,would,should,shouldnt,hopefully,maybe,possibly.

Got 12 mths to wait anyway!! Anything could happen.



> When or if Zinc prices fall I'll overtake Tech...




If they fall to my exit I'll be out and I'll buy something else.


----------



## Realist (27 October 2006)

Tech, you do the maths, show me what below is wrong?

We agreed equal position sizing.

You're up 3.5%   Thanks to starting prices earlier than mine, and zinc basically... 

Code Buy Current Percentage
ARG 7.39 7.7 4.19%
ASX 34.3 36.05 5.10%
AUN 1.31 1.205 -8.02%
BIL 12.8 12.68 -0.94%
IGO 4.98 5.01 0.60%
IVC 5.58 5.3 -5.02%
KZL 5.95 7.21 21.18%
MRE 4.98 5.2 4.42%
QBE 24.59 24.42 -0.69%
TRS 7.95 8.4 5.66%
ZFX 13.08 14.65 12.00%
TOTAL 3.50%


----------



## Sean K (27 October 2006)

Is this still 'in good spirits'? LOL

You two doing this for a whole year will end in WWV. 

 :shoot:  :bigun2:


----------



## tech/a (27 October 2006)

Whatever.

You keep score for me to Realist.
I have no interest.

Its like dealing with a 
child. Its not fair he's started before I did.
Hes got all the best stocks.He trades to maximise profit.
Hes beating me.

All the best with your trading.

Game over for me,it will either be ego massaging if he out performs or its just not fair if he doesnt.


----------



## clowboy (27 October 2006)

LMAO


----------



## Realist (27 October 2006)

tech/a said:
			
		

> You keep score for me to Realist.




I did, and the results are there for all to see and they differ widely from your stories!!   



> Its not fair he's started before I did.




Why not use the same start date as me?  What is so difficult about that? Why start earlier when the ASX (and your stocks) were lower?



> Hes got all the best stocks.He trades to maximise profit.
> Hes beating me.




Nope, you're stocks are no better than mine, you just got a good ride on Zinc which half happened before this comp started.    Same with MRE - we both hold it yet your buy price in this comp is lower than mine which is not fair obviously.

On Monday RIN will rise 27%, you'll probably find I am equal with you overall if we used the same start dates.  



> Game over for me,




How convenient...


----------



## barney (28 October 2006)

barney said:
			
		

> Hey Realist and Tech, you need not take anything I say seriously (but you can if you like)  If the competition is to be totally fair and "judgeable" by your peers/admirers (yeah OK I think your'e both smart ... what can I say!!) ,  Shouldn't you both a) set a start date ......... b) Paper trade your selections for the period in question ( and post results) so that a "true judgement" can be considered over the time in question .............. Using "positions" already in play is like starting a race while the other guy is in the dunny... so to speak (whichever guy that may be )  ...... Hope that makes sense ....It does to me, but I've been subject to loud music for much of my life    ................... For the comp to work, it must start from a clean slate!!!!
> 
> PS I STILL want to hold the carton (less tax) ........ Have I made that clear yet!!!  Good onya both, Barney.  (even Barney has some good ideas  at times..... sometimes I impress myself ............mmm .......... gotta cook tea for my wife ........... she is not happy with the time I spend on the computer
> 
> PPS Lets Assume $100,000 starting bank each, and see who finishes best in the period of time agreed on ....... ???? Hows that sound?





Now if you two lads had taken my advice above, (start with a clean slate ... same amount of capital ..... same start date .... and paper trade the results for a "fair dinkum" result) none of this "unhappiness" would have occurred, and we on the sidelines would have gotten our moneys worth     I feel like I've paid to see a footy match and the ref decided to go home early!! .... Come on ...one more try for all us punters watching       Barney.


----------



## Realist (28 October 2006)

I agree Barney!  I am keen.

We can just see how our shares go anyway.


----------



## 2020hindsight (15 November 2006)

tech/a said:
			
		

> 1. Realist its my veiw that your portfolio is far to diversified and as such will perform pretty much to the market.
> 2. But hey thats from someone who "doesnt know how to trade"




 :iagree: 
especially on point 2


----------



## tech/a (15 November 2006)

As realist is not here to annoy the bejeezes out of me.

Start $350316
Now  $390391

11.4% in the first month.


----------



## Realist (6 December 2006)

> Originally Posted by tech/a
> 1. Realist its my veiw that your portfolio is far to diversified and as such will perform pretty much to the market.
> 2. But hey thats from someone who "doesnt know how to trade"




   Ahh think again mate...



			
				Tech/a said:
			
		

> As realist is not here to annoy the bejeezes out of me.
> 
> Start $350316
> Now $390391
> ...




That is lovely Tech, but excluding dividends (which I will be counting later of course)..

I am up 18.38% so far...   


BHP 	27.35	26.63	-2.63%
BSL 	6.71	8.08	20.42%
CAQ  	0.205	0.24	17.07%
CBA  	47	46.91	-0.19%
CBH  	0.53	0.8	50.94%
CQT 	0.49	0.435	-11.22%
DRT  	1.675	1.675	0.00%
EVE  	0.1	0.195	95.00%
FBU  	8.15	8.9	9.20%
FDL  	0.015	0.018	20.00%
FGL  	6.46	6.55	1.39%
FUN 	1.63	1.385	-15.03%
HCY  	0.015	0.021	40.00%
IAG  	5.68	5.94	4.58%
JPR  	0.082	0.057	-30.49%
MRE 	5.31	6.38	20.15%
MTN  	0.76	1.39	82.89%
PMH  	0.43	0.485	12.79%
PRG  	4.43	4.95	11.74%
RIN  	14.53	18.45	26.98%
RIO 	75.29	77.66	3.15%
USA  	0.2	0.365	82.50%
WDC  	18.75	19.05	1.60%
WDCNB 	18.48	18.51	0.16%
18.38%


----------



## TheRage (6 December 2006)

Realist said:
			
		

> Ahh think again mate...
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Realist I am assuming that you have equal postions in each of these shares?

I am not trying to take a dig at you but I am interested to see your reasoning behind investing in so many small caps when you quote Warren Buffet in your signature? A number of them look like speculators to me. Furthermore tech has a point about diversification, buffet certainly doen't subscribe to this methodology.

Cheers
Ryan


----------



## stink (6 December 2006)

Oh Sweet,

This should be like watching an Ashes match that goes for 12months   

Should be another good learning experience for all.

Cheers Stink


----------



## Realist (6 December 2006)

TheRage said:
			
		

> Realist I am assuming that you have equal postions in each of these shares?




No, but for the purpose of this competition I do...



> I am not trying to take a dig at you but I am interested to see your reasoning behind investing in so many small caps when you quote Warren Buffet in your signature? A number of them look like speculators to me. Furthermore tech has a point about diversification, buffet certainly doen't subscribe to this methodology.
> 
> Cheers
> Ryan




I'm not a huge Buffet fan actually, and I do not try and copy him, although I admire him and do believe his strategies are excellent. I am a Ben Graham fan, he believed in wide and varied diversification and was not against investing in smaller companies if you got in for a good price. But he too would wince at some of the specs I've bought, then again he'd also be impressed with my results...  Graham knows all too well people love to speculate.


----------



## TheRage (7 December 2006)

Cheers

Good luck with your speculators and the bet.

Ryan


----------



## Realist (8 December 2006)

Tech, ZFX and KZL are dropping like a cheap hookers draws.

Are you still holding them?


Pacmag in trading halt, could be good news!!   :


----------



## Julia (29 December 2006)

With the announcement of Tech's retirement, what is the fate of this competition between Realist and Tech/A?

It was very entertaining while it lasted.

Is Realist now the default winner???


Julia


----------



## Bobby (29 December 2006)

Julia said:
			
		

> With the announcement of Tech's retirement, what is the fate of this competition between Realist and Tech/A?
> 
> It was very entertaining while it lasted.
> 
> ...



Julia,
Who cares ?


----------



## Realist (13 January 2007)

It is still going.

I'm up around 25%, not yet including dividends and the free USA options (which is fair to include as the stock dropped 20% yesterday as the free options date came around - My USA profit at current price gives me another 54% profit for USA.  You need to include free options, takeovers, dividends and splits etc. of course, and tax and brokerage).

BHP 	27.35	25.1	-8.23%
BSL 	6.71	8.3	23.70%
CAQ  	0.205	0.21	2.44%
CBA  	47	49.4	5.11%
CBH  	0.53	0.7	32.08%
CQT 	0.49	0.63	28.57%
DRT  	1.675	1.71	2.09%
EVE  	0.1	0.225	125.00%
FBU  	8.15	9.4	15.34%
FDL  	0.015	0.016	6.67%
FGL  	6.46	6.78	4.95%
FUN 	1.63	1.67	2.45%
HCY  	0.015	0.019	26.67%
IAG  	5.68	6.53	14.96%
JPR  	0.082	0.041	-50.00%
MRE 	5.31	5.69	7.16%
MTN  	0.76	1.91	151.32%
PMH  	0.43	0.46	6.98%
PRG  	4.43	5.08	14.67%
RIN  	14.53	17.83	22.71%
RIO 	75.29	73.5	-2.38%
USA  	0.2	0.465	132.50% (not including 1 for 2 free options at 25c (free 21.5c profit per 2 shares)
WDC  	18.75	20.98	11.89%
WDCNB 	18.48	20.55	11.20%
TOTAL (ex dividends and options)		24.49%


----------



## Realist (13 January 2007)

Tech is up 8.6% not including any dividends etc....

Code	Buy	Current	Percentage
ARG	7.39	8.01	8.39%
ASX	34.3	38.4	11.95%
AUN	1.31	1.335	1.91%
BIL	12.8	12.82	0.16%
IGO	4.98	3.9	-21.69%
IVC	5.58	5.42	-2.87%
KZL	5.95	6.6	10.92%
MRE	4.98	5.69	14.26%
QBE	24.59	29.99	21.96%
TRS	7.95	9.73	22.39%
ZFX	13.08	16.64	27.22%
		TOTAL	8.60%


----------



## mb1 (9 August 2007)

Hey Realist. Just going through this old post. Whats percentage are you up now? have you added anymore or sold any stocks since.

cheers


----------



## Knobby22 (9 August 2007)

Realist

Congrats.
But it's not due to great stock picking. You have only kept pace with the market.

Knobby


----------



## yonnie (12 August 2007)

well knobby, to be honest Realist never wanted to outdo the share market, but to keep pace with the up and downs of the market and raking in the dividends.

according to a lawyer Realist will lose: his bet was that he would make 12% including dividends. well it will be almost impossible to make exactly 12%.

but if we look at what he really means in that he will make 12% or more: yes he probably might win the bet.

and if tech accepted the bet, I hope he`s man enough to send him the beer despite his later withdrawal. a bet is a bet is a bet.


----------



## JeSSica WaBBit (12 August 2007)

Yep, i'm looking forward to the despatch of the beverages myself!!!!

In the name of good sportsmanship and honor i do hope that Tech has not retired prematurely. Indeed, nothing would disappoint me greater as i always enjoy reading his posts and particularly this thread.

Ego's aside, i encorage both of you to continue with friendly bantar and the competition.

To me who wins is irrelevant, but it is what we learn from the experience that is important.

Now back to the ring.....................


----------



## BentRod (12 August 2007)

> ......whether I can hold all of the below until Oct 16th 2007, and make 12% including dividends.......




It's not finished yet.

Tech has blown 12% PA to the weeds, live on reefcap for ages anyway.


----------



## Realist (18 December 2007)

I'm back.

Yeah at todays prices (bear in mind we've all been brutally hammered the last 2 days) I made about 42% including dividends from the start of this bet..

My best performer was FDL.
Worst was FUN


----------



## Realist (18 December 2007)

Tech did very well also - close to 31% overall going by todays figures.

Best performer was the ASX..


----------



## prawn_86 (18 December 2007)

Gday realist,

just curious, what is your return if you take FDL out of your portfolio?

ie -  what % of total gain did it contribute?

thanks and well done


----------



## Realist (18 December 2007)

prawn_86 said:


> Gday realist,
> 
> just curious, what is your return if you take FDL out of your portfolio?
> 
> ...




About 22%... 

The reason you diversify is twofold - you protect yourself from losses by spreading the risk, and you give yourself a chance to hit a windfall by buying more tickets.

To suggest someone with 20 shares "got lucky" when one jackpots is missing the point.

Much like it would be silly to suggest someone who put all of their life savings into one company was unlucky when it goes under.


----------



## prawn_86 (18 December 2007)

Sorry, i wasnt meaning to imply you got lucky.

I have a buy and hold strategy also, although sometimes my timeframe is only 4 - 6 months.

I was just curious more than anything.

You certainly smashed my return out of the water


----------



## Sean K (18 December 2007)

Realist said:


> About 22%...
> 
> The reason you diversify is twofold - you protect yourself from losses by spreading the risk, and you give yourself a chance to hit a windfall by buying more tickets.
> 
> ...






prawn_86 said:


> Sorry, i wasnt meaning to imply you got lucky.




I disagree with Prawn. Pure @rse picking FDL. It's a diamond company. It's iron most likely wasn't even on the justification for the buy. So, in retrospect, you might have well have thrown a dart at the board. But, good toss anyway!


----------



## The Mint Man (18 December 2007)

I havn't seen realist around for Fing ages


----------



## Realist (18 December 2007)

kennas said:


> I disagree with Prawn. Pure @rse picking FDL. It's a diamond company. It's iron most likely wasn't even on the justification for the buy. So, in retrospect, you might have well have thrown a dart at the board. But, good toss anyway!




Yep - I don't disagree!!!

J:xmastree


----------



## Sean K (18 December 2007)

Realist said:


> Yep - I don't disagree!!!
> 
> J:xmastree



But perhaps this goes to show that throwing darts can be just as successfull as TA and/or FA? Maybe it could depend on the cycle? Maybe on the quality of dart throwing?

Not to say that you guys have done tremendously well the past year. Good darts!! LOL. 

I think the real test would be in a downward trending market, which you can test next year perhaps? 

Have you lost your job Realist?


----------



## wayneL (19 December 2007)

Realist said:


> Tech did very well also - close to 31% overall going by todays figures.
> 
> Best performer was the ASX..




IIRC Tech/a bailed on the whole PF a few months back


----------



## clayton4115 (6 July 2008)

great to have seen the results today (6 months later all down 20% i bet!


----------



## tech/a (6 July 2008)

clayton4115 said:


> great to have seen the results today (6 months later all down 20% i bet!




I'll take that bet.
What was it you wanted me to relieve you of?


----------



## clayton4115 (6 July 2008)

anyone can make money in a bull market,  hell i made an unrealised gain off $125k during those hey days to only see it disappear to a -$45k unrealised loss

its making money in a bear market that counts,

a high tide lifts all boats...


----------



## tech/a (6 July 2008)

Dont disagree. I took mine.

But this bet?
Id like a new boat.
How much did you want me to fleece off you?

Before I post from 12/12/07 - NOW.



> its making money in a bear market that counts,




Not all boats have holes. Not all Captains steer their ships into light houses either.


----------



## clayton4115 (6 July 2008)

ok, my bet is that the market will open lower tomorrow.


----------



## tech/a (6 July 2008)

> 6 months later all down 20% i bet!




T/T is up 9% in the last 6 mths.
Realists I havent calculated but from his picks.
Would be down atleast 20%

Code --21/12 price---Now.

BHP 39.65   40.70
BSL 9.39   9.76
CAQ .16   .16
CBA 57.70   42.30
CBH .54   .19
CQT .58   .45
DRT 2.00   1.62
EVE .135   .068
FBU 9.80   4.97
FDL .094   .20---seems to have merged or something last trade in may.
FGL 6.49   4.71
FUN .62   .50
HCY---last trade 17/12
IAG 4.10   3.69
JPR .105   .11
MRE 5.79   2.98
MTN 2.00   1.34
PMH .30   .265
PRG 5.13   3.44
RIN--cant find it at all not even the code.
RIO 128.50   125.70
USA .25   .12
WDC 21.10   16.10
WDCNB ceased in August.07


----------



## bvbfan (7 July 2008)

FDL > FMS now

RIN taken over by Cemex


----------



## MichaelD (7 July 2008)

tech/a said:


> T/T is up 9% in the last 6 mths.
> Realists I havent calculated but from his picks.
> Would be down atleast 20%




What really puzzles me is that this has been proven repeatedly, but STILL people insist on bottom picking and holding on to their losers because "it's a good company".

People really do continue to behave in the same way and expect a different result.

(Actually it doesn't really puzzle me, it's human nature).


----------

