Let me see now, HIH, Lehman Bros, Enron, World Com, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, GMH. You would of course agree that these were all blue chip stocks once upon a time, wouldn't you?
Rio Tinto used to be over $120 per share, Macquarie Bank over a $100, Telstra $8, even NAB towards $50, dividends sure.
The days of just casually buying and holding blue chips are far gone.
That makes no sense. You should be investing/trading for yourself, not your grandchildren. Investigate the concept of opportunity cost.No it's not. If you hold a selection of stocks from various sectors in profitable companies paying dividends you don't need to sell everything. Ever. When I invest in shares I have an entry and and exit strategy, however if I bought a stock that underperformed I am more than happy to hold for as long as it takes to make money - if that means the grandchildren get the spoils then so be it.
Then, well, what?To sell everything is to take a gamble that the market will fall heavily in every sector. If you can accurately predict that then, well...
Thank you, cynic. Exactly right on both counts.To buy or hold is also a gamble. For those that are yet to realise this, unfolding events will make my meaning increasingly apparent.
As for end of days scenarios, there is simply no upside to selling if it's the end of human life on earth because you won't be alive to benifit from the salvaged capital! I believe that was what Julia was driving at when commenting on your earlier post.
Let me see now, HIH, Lehman Bros, Enron, World Com, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, GMH. You would of course agree that these were all blue chip stocks once upon a time, wouldn't you?
Good examples. Agree absolutely.HIH was regarded once as a blue chip, its gone. And all the advisers were saying Great Southern Plantations, gone. Blue Scope Steel another, nearly gone.
Rio Tinto used to be over $120 per share, Macquarie Bank over a $100, Telstra $8, even NAB towards $50, dividends sure but when you have lost that much ? hey, and they will probably never return! whewh.
they were saying Fortesque Metals was one when hitting $14 per share (not long back either), look at them now.
The days of just casually buying and holding blue chips are far gone.
The world scene is very dodgy at the moment and in my view the wise will be sitting on the sidelines in cash and probably pick up some bargain blue chips off the cutters floor too.
Buying and holding a blue chip stock is not a gamble at all.
Certainly those people had left it too late. There was a general sense of the possibility of "losing everything".Sure but the people who sold at the start are in the minority, im talking about the transfer of wealth that happened at the height of the panic, stocks selling for less than cash backing etc, liquidation at any price as an expression of fear and panic.
I read this sort of statement all the time. If you "continued to buy into the carnage", for it to be meaningful you'd have had to have a considerable amount of cash sitting around for that purpose.I was very new to the scene back then and i thought that i was safe being mostly invested in gold stocks, big picture i was right and had picked the right trend to back but in the short term the gold stocks got smashed too, my portfolio value fell by about 45% and yet i held and continued to buy into the carnage.
Using the same principle you're outlining here, you could have sold your CBA when the GFC began, then had all that additional capital available to buy it back in increased quantity (thus also increasing your dividend yield and franking credits) after the downturn was over.I remember this time well. I was heavily invested in the big 4 banks. All of them did capital raisings that were well under the market price, I took the lot, as much as I could get. I had one friend who had some CBA and asked me what to do. I told him that I would buy as much as I could, he said he didn't have any money. I said to him ok, what you can do is sell CBA at todays price of $29 and buy back from the capital raising the same $$ amount at $26. He sold all of CBA at $29 and didn't buy back at $26. He was that panicked he made a bad decision. I don't need to tell anyone where CBA is today.
Can you run me through your sums for this comparison?Using the same principle you're outlining here, you could have sold your CBA when the GFC began, then had all that additional capital available to buy it back in increased quantity (thus also increasing your dividend yield and franking credits) after the downturn was over.
And yes, of course few people are smart enough to sell at the exact top and buy at the exact bottom. That's a given.
The picture helps.
The top traders and investors on here would do something like this. First they follow the sentiment and that is reflected in a chart.
At the end of 2007 it was clear that something was wrong on the chart and in the discussions on ASF, so most of the savvy would have been out of CBA at or before $58.
Just a year later, Ben Benanke said we were saved and the markets looked oversold. It's clear too if we look at the chart so Savvy is back in around $28.
Explod - unfortuntely that doesn't help me, I'm well aware to bring up a chart.
I'll add an additional question to my previous post - what indicators are you using to make these assumptions of $28 and $58? Is this merely hindsight talking or is there more to it? I really can't tell from your post!
I will disclose that I bought at $44 and sold at $59 recently. No longer holding or wanting to hold.
With respect...i think your dreamin.
The Jan 2008 bottom trend line was $56 i imagine some support buyers mite of been interested at that level and the savvy had been stuffing their pockets with profits for the last 6 years and were keen to see it continue, most of the volume for 2008 happened at around the $43 mark..were these buyers savvy?
Savvy Back in at $28some perhaps, someone was on the other side of all those cheap trades and it wasn't momentum followers....you make it all sound to easy explod..it certainly wasn't easy for me, i agonised over many decisions mostly due to my limited funds, i had to get bang for my bucks.
CBA has gone from 24 to 62, i bought ILU at 2.95 and sold at 12.30 i got bang for some of my bucks.a lot more bang than the bank buyers got.
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6067&page=3&p=421212&viewfull=1#post421212
No, Ves. You can do the sums for yourself.Can you run me through your sums for this comparison?
No idea and not especially relevant to the point I'm making which is that it was beneficial to sell at or close to the high for some years given the clear disaster on the way globally and, if you still regarded the stock as worth buying, then buy in at a much lower price.Is it fair to assume that the hypothetical person purchased at the end of 2003 for $30 (since the market started looking better at that point or so).
No, Ves. You can do the sums for yourself.
Let's just look at the broad picture, taking the start of 2008 as our beginning. By this time, if you'd been following world events (much of this is referred to above by Explod), and formed the clear view that the global financial situation was unravelling from its artificially induced highs, let's say you sold here when CBA was around $60.
Then you sat out in cash and watched the market fall, and fall, until CBA reached $25.
It's pretty obvious, isn't it, that by at that stage (or close to it) you used your cash accumulated from selling at $60 to buy far more shares at $25 ish? And clearly, given the yield is expressed in so many cents per share, you would pretty obviously be pulling in a higher dividend yield and franking credits.
I have made it clear that I wasn't suggesting many people are going to judge the absolute top or bottom. I certainly didn't. But I sold at $56.I just had a look at the CBA annual report, a touch over 800000 shareholders..now how many do you think did the above or even close to it??
Seriously...its a fantasy that sort of perfect in out and in timing.
Hey Canoz or Joe or another admin that sees this thread can I please request that my previous posts in this thread are deleted?
To Julia and Explod I am sorry to have started this discussion. I am inable to communicate what I really want to say. I get the concept of selling at the top of the peaks and buying at the bottom again (it's obvious that this is the ideal strategy). But the whipsawing, tax, transactional costs and everything else in between that make the market a zero-sum game convince me that this is much easier to pull off in hindsight.
I'm not arguing that it is impossible - I'm just saying it's much harder that people think it is - hence why not many people out-perform the market indices.
Maybe it's just the fact that I'm dumb.
I just had a look at the CBA annual report, a touch over 800000 shareholders..now how many do you think did the above or even close to it??
Seriously...its a fantasy that sort of perfect in out and in timing.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?