DocK, point well made and point taken! In fact, your previous 'rant' is very rational and, for what it is worth, you ought to make it a submission to the Senate. That is, for what it is worth, because being the cynic that I am, I don't believe much will come of it. It's just another 'being seen to be doing something' exercise. In the end, maybe another layer of regulations which will ultimately be outwitted by another scheme.
It would be a pity that, after having learnt your lesson and paid for it so dearly, you turned your back completely on the capitalist system. We all more or less got there the same way as you are getting there right now: by trial and error!
Don't think for a moment that I personally wasn't tempted to take out a margin loan when things seemed to be going up and up and up - it just seemed all so easy! My online broker drowned me in promotional mail; every day as I opened the FinReview I was looking at full-page ads extolling the virtue of being geared up. Instinct told me not to! As you write, it's all about what you are comfortable with.
In response to the DocK #2188 post:
QUOTE
Twiceshy - I think you'll find that many regular posters on this forum have used borrowed money to invest in one form or another. Borrowing against home equity and margin lending are fairly common practices advocated by a plethora of financial planners - it's the level of gearing that can get you into trouble! I think you're a bit confused about what is short-term lending (presumably you mean margin lending by this?) and borrowing against the house - which was done on the same basis as any other home loan - we had a 25 year loan - hardly short-term.
UNQUOTE
Well, DocK, I AM confused: if you borrowed money against your house on a 25-year loan, how could you have been taken down? That would have been no margin loan!
If I had taken a mortgage against my house and then taken the stash of money to my sharebroker and told him to buy 10,000 BHP shares with it at the top of the market at $50, I would still be holding the shares today, despite the shares having gone as low as $20 in the meantime. Essentally, I could have spent the loan money on Iced Vovos and the lender couldn't have cared less because he was secured by the mortgage over my house.
So, please enlighten me, how did you get taken down? Was it because you didn't leave it at that but, having bought a Storm product (I refuse to call it an investment) with the proceeds from your house loan, you borrowed once again against the Storm product by way of margin loan?
Twiceshy - you seemed to have changed your mind overnight? Perhaps you need to re-read my original post? I have never claimed to have lost the lot and indeed I did retain part of my original investment. I use the word investment as units in a managed fund run by Challenger that invest exclusively in the All Ords 200 certainly qualifies as an investment in most people's opinion - if not yours. It has never been the nature of the investment that was questionable - and indeed it would have consisted of quite a few BHP shares, amongst other blue-chips that make up the top 200.
Your original post led me to believe you were confusing a home loan as being short-term, in comparison to a margin loan which certainly could be. I had both. I had a comfortable level of gearing prior to the market downfall and did not receive a margin call - all of this is in my original post.
As I have already stated (again in my original post) where I feel I was "taken down" - and I would prefer to use the words "misled" or perhaps even "deceived" was in the CBA re-valuing my home without my request using a highly questionable method and making that valuation available to Storm with the express intent to lend me more money - I relied on the valuation as being accurate and having been done on the same basis as prior valuations by a registered valuer in my area, who actually at least drove past my home. The hand-in-glove nature of the relationship between the branch of the CBA and Storm operating together as a sales force is what I object to, as I had been given no reason to suspect that my advisor and my banker had any other than the usual arms-length business relationship. The lending practices employed by some (if not all?) of the banks involved is where I feel let down.