Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Securing your Financial Independance

tech/a

No Ordinary Duck
Joined
14 October 2004
Posts
20,400
Reactions
6,317
This is a wide and varied topic.I have much to write here but I'm tied up this week with little time to write the lengthy discussion this topic deserves.

There are ways that people can make the very best of recourses they have to gain the maximum return on OPPORTUNITY.
Risk and Money Management are often talked about in the context of trading but hat about in line with our persuit of Financial independance?

Where do we go for guidance and advice?
My accountant who lectures in Tax Law and 2 friends who are Financial Planners---after 6 yrs are now bringing up the topic at social functions---prior to this I said very little and put up with rye smiles--knowing nods and tich tich as I ran various what if's past these "Experts".
My point here is that the "Experts" are in the same boat as you and I.
They may know the theory but just as in everyday life few are confident of their Risk and Money management structures to actually---

Do something with an opportunity!

I'm sure I'm not alone either with some of us who have planned and reaped the rewards---who KNOW---the steps to expand our ability to make the most of opportunity when it comes.To be able to put in place strategies that will limit risk and maximise return.
To us its simple as we have done it sometimes often and becomes second nature---to others its a mystery which alludes the Average person.

Not so I'm an average person.

To kick things off Snake Asked what I meant by this on another thread.

Snake.

I still see your topic as a tounge in cheek swipe at the Housing thread.

Anyway.
Whether it be Housing or Stocks the sooner people get themselves in a position that hiccups even big hiccups have little effect on their investments,the more comfortable and more successful they will be in
Wealth Creation and Management.

When opportunities can be taken without stress from the participant there is no need to predict/theoriese or hypothosise.

When people can say --who cares if Property decreases 20% in 4 yrs and who Cares if the Stock Market corrects 50% in the next 4 yrs--then they have FULL control of their financial futures.
It can be done and some are doing it.

This should be everyones aim!


Firstly Property.
If I have enough gearing to be positivly geared and I have a passive income above that which I need to service all expenses--then interest rates and even declines in house value will have little effect.
Interest rates rise and fall even to extremes---as do housing prices.
Its the ability to identify/adapt and make use of opportunities that reap the returns and minimise the downside.

In Share Trading.
Same with Shares if your a long term holder then the benifit of a long term holding can and does ensure that in the long run even sharp falls have minimal impact on your overall financial position.
There are many stratagies to minimise negative impact---one is Trading profit only after holding for 12 mths.Lats say you traded CTX from $3.60---which we did with Techtrader.After 12 mths it was worth around $10.

You could have sold at a 6.50 profit and let the profits run.To lose all the profit CTX would have to be delisted.Now multiply this idea over say 20 holdings over a number of years. You would have a good portfolio of profit stocks in 3-5 yrs.Not long in the scheme of Financial Independance---is it?

Do you think market fluctuations---even crashes would have as much impact on you as those trading short term???----Always watching intently,the O/S markets--stressed to the MAX.

Snake I hope this makes the statement clearer.
 
Re: Securing your Financial Independance.

I have a tip although it may be wasted here as you should know it if you have the $$$ to invest in shares.

Do not borrow money for stuff that goes down in value unless the benefits far outweigh the costs.

EG- Dont buy a brand new car. Maybe not even a newer second hand car. Optimal is older (5yrs plus) with low k's but a crappy colour. Look for white in particular. Watch the trading post for the same white car for about 6 weeks then go in for the kill. Re-sale wont be good but it wont matter because you will have saved enough money to invest (in some fashion). You could learn to spray-paint, change the colour and sell it at a profit! Even if youre a gumby, you could find a cheap spraypainter then off-load and still make a profit or get your money back after a couple of years.

There are some good points for business usage of brand new cars; leasing and such.

Read disclaimer below, idiot! :D
 
I read Rich Dad Poor Dad and learned a lot.

Good debt not bad - that is: it makes money to pay for the borrowing and provides income.

Negative gearing is crazy. Positive gearing allows you to steamroll your investments into bigger investments.

Don't work for money. Let money work for you.

Make money.
 
Negative gearing is not that bad.

I don’t like it, but providing you pay a lot of tax, does it really matter that process seemingly makes you poorer.
If you have the capacity to lose some money and it has the potential to make more, it is not bad; I cannot fault it anyway.

Remember that many people give to charity money they would have to pay in tax, paying tax is not glamorous, but giving to charity is, so why not?
 
Snake Pliskin said:
I read Rich Dad Poor Dad and learned a lot.

Good debt not bad - that is: it makes money to pay for the borrowing and provides income.

Negative gearing is crazy. Positive gearing allows you to steamroll your investments into bigger investments.

Don't work for money. Let money work for you.

Make money.

Snake:

why is negative gearing necessarily bad? I haven't borrowed any money for many years but at the time when I was earning a very high salary and paying megabucks in tax, negatively gearing an investment property made a great deal of sense to me. It was at a time of high inflation, high interest rates, and high rents. I tripled my money in less than two years. It all depends on personal circumstances and timing in the macro-economic sense.

Julia
 
Julia said:
Snake:

why is negative gearing necessarily bad? I haven't borrowed any money for many years but at the time when I was earning a very high salary and paying megabucks in tax, negatively gearing an investment property made a great deal of sense to me. It was at a time of high inflation, high interest rates, and high rents. I tripled my money in less than two years. It all depends on personal circumstances and timing in the macro-economic sense.

Julia

Julia,

I am sorry but I won't be able to respond to your question because it may be construed as giving financial advice. All I can say is I don't see the sense in it. It's just my opinion and if you don't agree with it I won't be upset. Enjoy your day.

Snake
 
Snake Pliskin said:
Julia,

I am sorry but I won't be able to respond to your question because it may be construed as giving financial advice. All I can say is I don't see the sense in it. It's just my opinion and if you don't agree with it I won't be upset. Enjoy your day.

Snake

Joe/Richkid:

Has it really come to this? I'm in no way being critical of the running of ASF and in fact would be the first to want you to ensure no criticism can be levelled by ASIC, but if we can't have a rational discussion as above, then I tend to agree with the opinion of others who feel there's little point in posting anything other than "General Chat".

Really good points have been made earlier in this thread about the potential liability of esteemed members of our government and their comments which, in the light of this discussion, surely do represent "financial advice".

Are we all getting a bit over-sensitive here?

I'm attracted to ASF as a forum because its members post intelligent and varied comments about many subjects, including stocks contained in the ASX.

Julia
 
Financial Independance is base on planning, Act and Revise.

Write down what you want and how you are going to do it. Then set strategy and follow it.

I start with property investing. At this stage I achieved what I plan for. With property investing. I got one simple rule. Buy 1 negative gear property and buy 2 positive gear properties. This will off set each other. So you basically holding to three property without have to worry about repayment if there is no income from your wage.

Set aside some cash in the cash management trust for unforseen circumstance where you can access it instantly.

I hope one day I be able to achieve financial independance as I planned.
 
Julia said:
Joe/Richkid:

Has it really come to this? I'm in no way being critical of the running of ASF and in fact would be the first to want you to ensure no criticism can be levelled by ASIC, but if we can't have a rational discussion as above, then I tend to agree with the opinion of others who feel there's little point in posting anything other than "General Chat".

Julia, there is nothing wrong with the free exchange of views and information and I think in all this discussion about government regulations we have lost sight of that one very important fact.

I DO think we all have to be careful not to say anything that can be construed as financial advice but to be honest it is not something I really see around here. I see very little ramping and even less (none actually) that could be construed as being deceptive in any way. I believe we have a very high standard of posting here at ASF.

Anyway, I am going through this issue with a fine tooth comb over the next couple of days and I'll start a thread mid-week about it, telling everyone what I think and the measures I will be taking to ensure ASF's complete compliance with the appropriate regulations.

We've got a good thing going here and I'm going to make sure it stays that way.
 
Happy said:
Negative gearing is not that bad.

For property it is all context and balance. I think that when negative gearing became popular people screwed it up and did it just for the deduction. Negative gearing simply means you can afford more property because you can write off some of the loss. But you are still left with a loss. The capital gains have to outweigh the out of pocket expenses for it to make sense. Also there is a servicability limit so you want the negative geared property to become positively geared as soon as possible.

Positive gearing is good as you don't get the servicability limit and is pushed hard by on "guru" in particular. One of the problems is that the marjority of positively geared properties fall into one of the following buckets:

. Regional areas with little or no capital growth
. New Units/Townhouses with high deductables

With the first you have to look at the income and even though it might be positive is usually small. With the second the same problem applies but worse the value of the depreciation shrinks very fast so you "could" end up negative gearing on a depreciating property if the land value does not move.

This is NOT to say that with research people have not found positively geared properties with reasonable capital growth or have actually made a property positively geared with some work as plenty do.

Personally, I think that for the average investor it is easier to recognise a property with a small amount of negative gearing with good growth potential.

For me I use the positive gearing with shares to balance out negative gearing with properties.

MIT
 
Im interested in peoples use of gearing and compounding.Your personal experience/s.
If you havent implemented their use how would you apply it/them and in what situation/s.
 
I have used gearing to buy shares and a property (part owned with family members). Gearing allows diversification and if you are not too deeply geared then you will end up positively geared after a few years. It also magnifies your capital.

It is also useful to be able to access funds quickly if an opportunity arises and it is hard to have that in cash.

Gearing has less advantages now as my tax rate is down to 30% like 98% of the population and as interest rates may be rising I think it is a good time to reduce the loans. I have stopped borrowing except that if I decide to borrow I'll sell something to keep the gearing level the same.

At present my shares are geared at 35% of their worth.
 
With property I look to positive gear for at least 10% interest. Put in extra cash and a negative gear becomes positive. Tech pointed this out to me a while ago. I was doing it but just with what the bank wanted with minimum money down.

Geared instruments such as CFDs, Forex, futures, will be my weapon of choice with the stockmarket. Banks are pretty narrow minded and have a hell of a lot of paperwork. My last deal saw a stack a foot high because there were 3 partners each with trust structures. As long as you can manage risk then i'd steer clear of them. See footer message, idiot! :D
 
Julia said:
Snake:

why is negative gearing necessarily bad? I haven't borrowed any money for many years but at the time when I was earning a very high salary and paying megabucks in tax, negatively gearing an investment property made a great deal of sense to me. It was at a time of high inflation, high interest rates, and high rents. I tripled my money in less than two years. It all depends on personal circumstances and timing in the macro-economic sense.

Julia

Julia,

From what I can see, negative gearing is not the best way to become financially independent. I do recognise that it can reduce your tax if you are employed though.

Read the following article for some information:
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/11/30/1070127267462.html?from=storyrhs

Another good link and more extensive is:
http://www.propertyinvesting.com/strategies/negativegearing.html

I have 5 years experience in Real Estate property mangement and saw a great deal of my clients gearing negatively just to minimise tax. They still had to work though.
A positively geared property is able to fund itself and the costs that go with it providng income. The cash flow aspect is what I like - it's positive. That is, it provides income.

An article on positive gearing:

http://moneymanager.smh.com.au/articles/2003/08/13/1060588426540.html

Regards
Snake :)
 
I'm quite happy to negitively gear a property, usually vacant land if I can a positive return in a set time frame. negitive gearing for the sake of only tax relief has never been in my plan, but to get a tax relief bonus on a negitive to positive transaction is a nice little cherry on top.

I run a margin on shares that sits at about 33% LRV. It just gives me a little more to play with.

Personally, I believe this whole idea of not answering a question due to it being "interperated as advice" is a farce. Equality for equals. People have rights, as we keep hearing from the bleeding heart masses, but what I rarely see is people rallying for the ability for more responsibility. If you can't accept responsibility for your own actions, you should lose your rights to be involoved in those actions. Common sense is not so common.
I hope Joe's post will let sanity prevail.

Regards,
 
tech/a said:
Im interested in peoples use of gearing and compounding.Your personal experience/s.
If you havent implemented their use how would you apply it/them and in what situation/s.

I can't afford to positively gear a property! Take a $250k property, getting rent of $200p/w, you would need to have nearly $100k in equity to positively gear wouldn't you?
 
Stan 101 said:
I'm quite happy to negitively gear a property, usually vacant land if I can a positive return in a set time frame. negitive gearing for the sake of only tax relief has never been in my plan, but to get a tax relief bonus on a negitive to positive transaction is a nice little cherry on top.

I run a margin on shares that sits at about 33% LRV. It just gives me a little more to play with.

Personally, I believe this whole idea of not answering a question due to it being "interperated as advice" is a farce. Equality for equals. People have rights, as we keep hearing from the bleeding heart masses, but what I rarely see is people rallying for the ability for more responsibility. If you can't accept responsibility for your own actions, you should lose your rights to be involoved in those actions. Common sense is not so common.
I hope Joe's post will let sanity prevail.


Regards,

Sanguar,

I've sorted it out with Joe. If you think I shouldn't be here then vote me off.
Common sense is not so common, nor are manners.
 
Snake Pliskin said:
Julia,

From what I can see, negative gearing is not the best way to become financially independent. I do recognise that it can reduce your tax if you are employed though.

Read the following article for some information:
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/11/30/1070127267462.html?from=storyrhs

Another good link and more extensive is:
http://www.propertyinvesting.com/strategies/negativegearing.html

I have 5 years experience in Real Estate property mangement and saw a great deal of my clients gearing negatively just to minimise tax. They still had to work though.
A positively geared property is able to fund itself and the costs that go with it providng income. The cash flow aspect is what I like - it's positive. That is, it provides income.

An article on positive gearing:

http://moneymanager.smh.com.au/articles/2003/08/13/1060588426540.html

Regards
Snake :)

Snake:

Thanks for the message.

I would never argue that negative gearing is a better alternative to positive gearing but Fleeta has provided the answer to this question.

At the time I did it, I had sufficient funds for a deposit on an investment property but certainly couldn't have bought it outright, so negatively geared it which helped to offset the very high tax I was paying at the time.

The two approaches are both perfectly valid depending on all the circumstances at the time.

Are you suggesting that if you couldn't afford to positively gear an investment property you wouldn't buy it at all?

Cheers
Julia
 
Snake Pliskin said:
Sanguar,

I've sorted it out with Joe. If you think I shouldn't be here then vote me off.
Common sense is not so common, nor are manners.

Snake Pliskin, firstly my name is SANQUAR,

And where did I refer to you? If you read my post the leaning was on the disability to speak one's mind. I attempt to show my manners to the best of my ability, therefore I won't go into how people's frail egos are damaged by generic postings.

Okay, I'll type this slowly. In a nutshell, I personally believe that if a person or persons comes to this forum and takes the "advice" from a posting, they should be responsible for their own actions if the "advice" was incorrect, wrong or just plain stupid. They should not cry to the nearest governing body demanding blood from the advice giver if they lose their life savings. Hence the common sense is not so common line. If they had common sense, they would have though through the investment. Which leads to the equality for equals.
If a human being doesn't have the ability to see that taking financial advice from a forum without substanciating any claims, in MY OWN personal view, they should lose their rights to do so.

If you want me to dumb it down some more, please let me know. Actually, it's not that important, so forget I just wasted 2 minutes retyping this for you.

regards,
 
Stan 101 said:
Snake Pliskin, firstly my name is SANQUAR,

And where did I refer to you? If you read my post the leaning was on the disability to speak one's mind. I attempt to show my manners to the best of my ability, therefore I won't go into how people's frail egos are damaged by generic postings.

Okay, I'll type this slowly. In a nutshell, I personally believe that if a person or persons comes to this forum and takes the "advice" from a posting, they should be responsible for their own actions if the "advice" was incorrect, wrong or just plain stupid. They should not cry to the nearest governing body demanding blood from the advice giver if they lose their life savings. Hence the common sense is not so common line. If they had common sense, they would have though through the investment. Which leads to the equality for equals.
If a human being doesn't have the ability to see that taking financial advice from a forum without substanciating any claims, in MY OWN personal view, they should lose their rights to do so.

If you want me to dumb it down some more, please let me know. Actually, it's not that important, so forget I just wasted 2 minutes retyping this for you.

regards,

Stan 101,

I'm sorry if I displeased you by spelling your name incorrectly - if it is a problem I am truly sorry.

I agree with your anlysis of people who may use information from forums.

The way you worded your post was in my opinion directed at me
Personally, I believe this whole idea of not answering a question due to it being "interperated as advice" is a farce.

I'm the only one who has written that in this thread; discern the connection can you?

Anyway, have a nice day and forget the whole thing.

Snake
 
Top