The Exceptional Wealth Accumulation Ideas and Thinking Thread

[Mr J]

So your saying you could earn 50% yr in yr out on your capital invested? (not trading as thats a business im talking investing which is long term)

A trading business is an investment. 50% on longterm trades? I have no idea, probably not. It's probably not productive to compare the examples, as I don't think any of us will accept 3% on 10 million as a worthwhile investment. I can only say that if they were trading results, the smaller strategy will scale well enough to significantly outperform the higher capital strategy.

one can be ordinary when it comes to investing in property thats leveraged

Property and shares have their advantages and disadvantages, but I think we need to be better than ordinary in both to truly get ahead.

A very average property with good leverage can beat a sharemarket expert with less leverage over the long term.

With greater exposure, perhaps.

 

[tasmart]

I pursued what I consider the lowest risk path. As I don't seek great financial wealth and view wealth as friends, family, health and happiness I decided setting up a business was not for me. I did not have the luxury of inherited wealth, but did receive a good education. The secret is there is no secret.
Maximise your hourly rate doing something you like and are good at. Continuously save and invest more than you earn and spend more time on financially educating yourself than watching sport and you'll end up wealthy. While nothing is risk free there, educating yourself has a high probability of success. If you learn something from everyone you come into contact with you'll be a success.

This is my strategy as well although the concept of hourly rate / high income/ business have become a bit overlapped.

My experience is that a lot of 'wealthy' retirees reap the rewards of this strategy. Nothing special. The odd major windfall (like holding from the initial CBA or CSL float). Involved in both real estate & shares. Good financial education. Making use of the changing tax environment. Long term investments with rebalance according to the cycles. Certainly not all eggs in one basket! And not risking large sections of their investments.

Time and compound interest are hard to beat - especially if not leveraged (eventually) and especially if don't need the capital - just income.

I'll let you know how I'm going in 30 years time

 

[ducati916]

Duc,



So you don't like Tech's assumptions, but you make them yourself.

What other "consumer durable good" returns rent??

I also have experience in multiple properties for nearly 30 years, and know how true is Tech's post.

Every investment is based on some assumptions, walking across the road with a green light is done with assumptions. TechA's assumptions are much better than yours.

brty

What other consumer durable returns rent - how about an automobile if you rent it out as a taxi during the week? How about a lawnmower that you hire out? How about a set of golf clubs that you hire out? The examples are numerous.

Actually, it wasn't an assumption, I was simply being conversational.

Well of course you are entitled to your preference.

jog on
duc

 

[tech/a]

tech/a seems to have a good strategy, the trick will be ensuring he is not over leveraged when rates rise and prices fall. I love leverage, but only to buy undervalued assets.

Yes very true and something I'm anal about.
Currently at 38%. Could be much lower but that would decrease my leverage to a point which to me is unacceptable in this environment.
Unlike many here I see opportunity---I'm glad others don't see what I see.
More so "How I see it" (Make opportunity).

When developing anything held long term is designed to bring down the total leverage % rather than add to it.
Sure it does in the short term but not in the long term.
Now developments only represent a small portion of nett worth so even leveraged exposure for a few years only adds 10-15% as I don't do developments which push anything to breaking point if a black swan event did occur.

Point here is that someone using ideas (which will come from discussion in Trading ) can go on to exceptional wealth accumulation say $5k to $10k---100% that's exceptional to their nett worth and eventually be doing what I and many others do----same game---different stakes.

Most appear to be missing the strategy

Move in get it done and reduce exposure to an absolute minimum while adding freehold or near to freehold carriages to the train. Ones which add passive income to the fuel supply.

Are we talking Business or investing.

Investing is a business to me.
In fact at times investment profit out performs my own company profits.

*Your calculations assume a continuous rise in capital values.

Yes. I have been on this planet 55 yrs and noticed that everything is higher than it was when I started working.

*Your calculations assume a continuous rise in rental values.

Yes.

*Your calculations assume demand continuing to be higher than supply.

In my area and in the small Zone 50 Sq Km I work in----Yes.
I'm not seeing anything to the contrary---

What other consumer durable returns rent - how about an automobile if you rent it out as a taxi during the week? How about a lawnmower that you hire out? How about a set of golf clubs that you hire out? The examples are numerous.

Yes but when they turn to dust--my dust will still appreciate in value!

My examples in the trading arena will certainly have discussion at a max if property is anything to go by.

 

[ducati916]

tech/a

*Your calculations assume a continuous rise in capital values.

Yes. I have been on this planet 55 yrs and noticed that everything is higher than it was when I started working.

*Your calculations assume a continuous rise in rental values.

Yes.

*Your calculations assume demand continuing to be higher than supply.

In my area and in the small Zone 50 Sq Km I work in----Yes.
I'm not seeing anything to the contrary---

Therefore would it not bear an exposition upon the fundamental factors driving those assumptions?

Housing capital values and rents rise due in part to the inflationary policy of governments seeking to abrogate property rights and control the supply of money through debasement. While they continue to do so, I agree that real property will inflate to match/exceed/trail that expansion.

In addition, there are favourable tax treatments of various components. While this is not unimportant, tax benefits can be had elsewhere, thus, for the moment we'll consider tax treatment a wash.

Thus an investment that returns circa the inflationary rate, isn't really that much of a wealth creating vehicle, rather, a wealth preserving vehicle.

Which brings us onto the only valid point in regards to the useage of residential real estate, the ability to acquire 100% leverage, and sometimes a little more, without facing a mark-to-market margin call

Thus the gains within this asset class are essentially are gains of leverage.

So for this thread to truly live up to it's title of exceptional thinking we would need to consider the possibilities of leverage within other asset classes to this level, and whether the returns are generated [outside of the leverage] would exceed the gains of an inflationary nature.

jog on
duc

 

[It's Snake Pliskin]

tech/a



Therefore would it not bear an exposition upon the fundamental factors driving those assumptions?

Housing capital values and rents rise due in part to the inflationary policy of governments seeking to abrogate property rights and control the supply of money through debasement. While they continue to do so, I agree that real property will inflate to match/exceed/trail that expansion.

In addition, there are favourable tax treatments of various components. While this is not unimportant, tax benefits can be had elsewhere, thus, for the moment we'll consider tax treatment a wash.

Thus an investment that returns circa the inflationary rate, isn't really that much of a wealth creating vehicle, rather, a wealth preserving vehicle.

Which brings us onto the only valid point in regards to the useage of residential real estate, the ability to acquire 100% leverage, and sometimes a little more, without facing a mark-to-market margin call

Thus the gains within this asset class are essentially are gains of leverage.

So for this thread to truly live up to it's title of exceptional thinking we would need to consider the possibilities of leverage within other asset classes to this level, and whether the returns are generated [outside of the leverage] would exceed the gains of an inflationary nature.

jog on
duc

Duc,

Minus the word "thus" and its overuse, you have written some good stuff of late.

 

[ducati916]

Duc,

Minus the word "thus" and its overuse, you have written some good stuff of late.

Obviously a nervous tic.

jog on
duc

 

[ducati916]

Trends to watch:
•Oil, coal, natural gas and the companies that service them.
•Electric cars are inevitable as we have passed peak oil. BYD is the best play I know of there, but the shares are now overpriced.
•As oil rises AE will have a second wave in it's current growth path. Vestas wind and GE in turbines. STP is the lowest cost producer in solar. These are not recommendations, you should look and wait for good entry points if you are interested. Solar is the riskiest.
•The fall of the USD, especially against commodity based currencies like AUD.
•The final end of this commodity boom. Wealth is made the fastest on the way down.

I've reproduced the analysis that first was posted on the blog, as such, some of the prices obviously are a little out of date.

Certainly from the chart we can see that oil the commodity, fell to $20/barrel during the 2001-2002 recession. As this recession is likely to be both deeper and longer, holding off for the time being would be prudent. At some point however, a longer term investment within this sector is likely to pay off.

Year……………….%Capitalization…………S&P500……Compounded gain
1929…………………..8.48%………………..30.10
1932………………….10.86%………………..7.12
1949………………….16.0%………………..15.29
1982………………….12.6%……………….109.70
2008………………….8.53%……………….876.77
……………………………………………………………………4.36% [not including dividends]

The oil majors were always within the first three sectors and very often the largest sector within the S&P500; thus their growth has been consistent with both the market and the economy.

While by comparison other “major sectors” have faded through the years, automobile, aircraft, rails and a host of other sectors that have simply disappeared. While it is true that alternative energy must become a focal point, oil is critical to so many products that it’s ultimate demise will take time.

Inflation.
With the incredible monetary stimulus that is now worldwide, there will be inflation, and possibly a very serious out of control inflation. China, who has amassed some $2 Trillion in foreign reserves, predominantly denominated in USD, with a rapidly slowing economy, due to contraction in demand from both the US & Europe, will do what with them?

Looked at another way, China will not be amassing further reserves at the rate that they had been. Thus an immediate consequence will be a rise in interest rates across the part of the curve where China was accumulating US Treasury paper. Should they also start to sell reserves, to fund their economy in a Keyenesian manner, again, interest rates will rise across that part of the curve.

In an inflationary environment, the purchase a real assets and commodities can hedge the inflationary pressures providing real returns. Oil, although subject to any number of risks, political, war, terrorist, environmental and supply/demand shocks, still provides an attractive commodity to invest in.

Should the bear market deepen, where would the likely purchasers come from? For the actual commodity, oil itself, the buyers would have to be the economies themselves, in the form of products, be that energy generation or as a component in product manufacture. With a recession of potential depth forming, economies could well cut back for the indeterminate future.

With equity, the buyers might likely be corporations themselves. In an inflationary environment, rising prices of land, plant, reserves, and other input costs, rise with inflation. The price of equity however tends to fall, thus making it cheaper to consolidate, rather than expand.

Therefore, in an inflationary environment, it would be more rational to look to purchase equity that will appreciate in real terms in either scenario.

We would want in trying economic conditions one of the majors, who has the ability to withstand the economic downturn and capability to expand through consolidation, acquiring competitors at advantageous prices.

Exxon Mobil Corporation (Exxon Mobil) through its divisions and affiliates is engaged in exploration for, and production of, crude oil and natural gas, manufacture of petroleum products and transportation and sale of crude oil, natural gas and petroleum products. Exxon Mobil is a manufacturer and marketer of commodity petrochemicals, including olefins, aromatics, polyethylene and polypropylene plastics and a range of specialty products. Exxon Mobil also has interests in electric power generation facilities. Affiliates of Exxon Mobil conduct research programs in support of these businesses. Exxon Mobil Corporation has several divisions and affiliates, many with names that include Exxon Mobil, Exxon, Esso or Mobil. The Company operates in three segments: Upstream, Downstream and Chemicals. In April 2008, Galp Energia SGPS S.A. has acquired Exxon Mobil Corporation’s businesses in Spain and Portugal.

First some of the problems.

It would seem that management are capitalising a portion of receivables onto the Balance Sheet. I would suspect that these are potential writedowns at some point in the future. Assume the worst and adjust for them as writedowns at $0.29/share

Management are also capitalising Operating expenses. This of course directly enhances the bottom line, and inflates Net Income. This is particularly obvious in the forthcoming 2008 financials, where I have adjusted for potential results [obviously they may be slightly better or worse] thus I have adjusted by $0.16/share

Total adjustments = $0.45/share

Positive adjustments.

Management have discretionary cashflows through squeezing suppliers of some $0.21/share that has offset the deductions.

Adjusted per share adjustments = $0.21 – $0.45 = [-$0.44/share]
Adjusted Net Income = $9.80 – $0.44 = $9.36/share

The margins, notwithstanding the adjustments are outstanding. With a six year aggregate of 16.5% on a primarily common stock capitalization, this represents an outstanding return.

The common stock capitalization at 90%+ shows very low leverage. This in the current climate in part accounts for the relative out performance of XOM to it’s peers.

Pension liabilities = $34.5 Bil
Pension Assets = $27.8 Bil

While underfunded, this is not at a point of danger with XOM’s earning power taken into consideration.

Reserves are at 21.5 Bil bbs [oil/gas] which represents circa 22.6 yrs based on the current 2.6 Mil daily production. Thus, there is a substantial timeframe of safety currently.

Reserves are being replaced at a 1.74% compounded rate. They are thus growing at 0.74% compounded. This represents value for common share holders.

Common shares are [and have been] the subject of repurchase. To date the ownership base has been reducing at a 2.8% compounded basis. Thus, holders are benefitting from this management policy.

That XOM is a resource company, oil & gas, thus the investor must account for the depletion of the assets, including plant. The amounts charged off by the company are quite likely to be irrelevant for the individual investor, thus, he should make his own.

If we place the reserves at a optimistic 20 yrs and a conservative 11 yrs, we can then amortize the value in the ground and ascertain whether we are buying value.

…………………………………………………6 yrs………………..Current
Paid for entire company……………….$363822……………$423958
Less Cash Assets……………………….$26051……………..$38434
Paid for company………………………$337771……………$385524

Earnings before amortization………..$60320………………$91406
Earnings required on cash @ 5%……$1302……………….$1921
Balance earned on drilling……………$59017……………..$89484
% earned before amortization……….17.4%………………..23%

Investors amortization
11 yrs [maximum]……………………$5311……………….$8053
20yrs [minimum]…………………….$3016………………..$4474

Earned after amortization
Minimum earnings…………………..$53705………………$81431
Maximum earnings………………….$57304………………$85010

% earned on investment
Minimum……………………………..15.9%…………………21%
Maximum…………………………….17.4%…………………22%

Valuation = $136.52/share
This is a conservative valuation, and thus trading at circa $77.00/share represents a 76% discount from fair value.

In summary, barring some management manipulation, Exxon represents a conservatively capitalised, highly profitable and massively undervalued investment common stock.

jog on
duc

 

[tech/a]

I have no interest in expert opinion other than amusement value.

I have seen enough expert opinion proven so far out of whack that I just ignore it.

Ive never seen "experts" headlining
Buy as much property as you can now!
Sell all your equities in Super now and beat the crash.
Buy GOLD
Sell OIL

Endless argument
Just look at the housing threads on this site!!
Argument is safer!


All I'm interested in is my own micro field of Business/Investment with a macro outlook.TIME will ensure I get it RIGHT.

The best I can do is place a train on the tracks (Investment Portfolio),own as much of it as I can (Equity),Keep adding carriages to the train (Portfolio).

It will at times move backwards.(Draw down)
Sometimes do Nothing.(Time)
Often move slowly forward.(Growth)
Perhaps 4-5 times in a lifetime belt ahead full steam never to return to the same position on the track.(Exceptional Wealth Accumulation.)

Now If I dont have a train!???

 

[ducati916]

tech/a

As you seem happy in your real estate box, I'm quite prepared to leave the subject.

For those who joined the thread potentially interested in looking at means to generate wealth, then perhaps it's time to move forward.

The one big advantage of real estate, is the non-mark-to-market ability to gain leverage. This leverage is normally provided with a major limiting factor however. The leverage is granted against a combination of income and collateral, both, in the early days may well limit the amount of leverage that you can initially access.

There is an interesting source however of financial market based leverage, that essentially is unlimited, and has no mark-to-market component when correctly structured.

The Hedge Fund, or rather Limited Partner Investment Trust. Here, you, leverage your skill base to provide returns to outside money for a 2/20 structure + lockdown period.

So you gain a 2% management fee + 20% of the profits for managing money in the financial markets. Of course you need an audited track record, that demonstrates the validity of your claims to return XYZ.

Money available for such ventures can start around $10M - $100M. Thus assuming the upper-end, as it's just so much more exciting, you stand to earn $2M as a management fee + 20% of let's say a 30% return is another $6M for a total of $8M in your first year.

That sort of leverage, no pesky interest payments to the bank, just pure gravy, are the sort of big idea's that will make you wealthy. There are of course a few others...

jog on
duc

 

[matty2.0]

tech/a


So you gain a 2% management fee + 20% of the profits for managing money in the financial markets.
duc

lol ... who the heck is gonna pay you 2/20 + lockdown ... industry averages are like 0.5-1.0% + free flight ... 99% of funds don't ever go over 1%. You've been reading to many newbie investment books. hahah ... You're dreaming ... living in a fantasy world. Those days are gone. :nuts:

 

[tech/a]

As you seem happy in your real estate box, I'm quite prepared to leave the subject.

There was some doubt?

Money available for such ventures can start around $10M - $100M. Thus assuming the upper-end, as it's just so much more exciting, you stand to earn $2M as a management fee + 20% of let's say a 30% return is another $6M for a total of $8M in your first year.

30% on 10-100 mill.
20% management fee.
Proven track record of the 30% return.

Vast difference between dreaming and doing Ducster.

 

[matty2.0]

There was some doubt?

30% on 10-100 mill.
Vast difference between dreaming and doing Ducster.

lol ... :nuts::nuts:

 

[moreld]

tech/a. I think we all totally agree you need a train. I like your analogy.

duc, nice writeup on XOM. Have you looked at COP? Oil is not my in my wheelhouse, but I'm slowly trying to get up to speed. I mention COP as Buffett took a stake at considerably higher prices.
A quick comparison http://finance.yahoo.com/q/co?s=COP shows it has half the revenues and almost half the EBITDA of XOM yet sells for 28% of the price based on EV. That makes me want to dig deeper into COP.

Sorry all, I know this should be on a different thread, but still finding my way around ASF.

 

[ducati916]

There was some doubt?



30% on 10-100 mill.
20% management fee.
Proven track record of the 30% return.

Vast difference between dreaming and doing Ducster.

tech/a

Come now, the title of this thread placed emphasis on exceptional and thinking Property is hardly exceptional.

Leverage via a HF is to the proprietor, risk free. It also substantially exceeds the leverage available to property based on the previous caveats. That is an important point when you enter into the consideration of risk. Leverage into real estate most certainly is not risk free.

Due to the rather poor showing of many [majority] of HF's during the past market volatility, some feel that the 2/20 model is no longer realistic. I would disagree, 2/20 is quite easily obtainable to the right person/strategy.

With regard to your numbers:

30% on 10-100 mill.
20% management fee.
Proven track record of the 30% return.

Vast difference between dreaming and doing Ducster.

I'm not sure I follow you here.

With regard to doing and dreaming, certainly I agree. Certainly without the ability to generate whatever returns necessary to gain you the capital, you'll have problems.

Here though, actually what is far more important to institutional investors, is not the absolute returns generated, rather the drawdown. The more volatile your fund, the smaller in dollar terms will be the interest in investing. With a small drawdown, and reasonable return, 8%, you'll easily draw your $10M start.

Where you can start.

Couple of possibilities: Prop Shop, where you have access to lot's of mark-to-market leverage, but also lot's of rules etc. But if you are consistent, they will relax them after a time. Or, an institutional trading desk. Probably not so easy currently.

The third and final way is keep an audited record with a third party of real trades. Ensure that the trades are scaleable, in that placing an order for 100 shares in XYZ may not be practiable if you need 1,000,000 shares of XYZ. You'll need at least three years, and then you do the rounds.

jog on
duc

 

[ducati916]

tech/a. I think we all totally agree you need a train. I like your analogy.

duc, nice writeup on XOM. Have you looked at COP? Oil is not my in my wheelhouse, but I'm slowly trying to get up to speed. I mention COP as Buffett took a stake at considerably higher prices.
A quick comparison http://finance.yahoo.com/q/co?s=COP shows it has half the revenues and almost half the EBITDA of XOM yet sells for 28% of the price based on EV. That makes me want to dig deeper into COP.

Sorry all, I know this should be on a different thread, but still finding my way around ASF.

moreld

I've looked at COP in the past. Here's the analysis.

The problem area is the Balance Sheet. The excess of Current Liabilities over Current Assets for a Current Ratio of 0.96 and a 5yr average of 0.92 is a concern in the current [and any future] credit environment. In essence you would require no exogenous events have the ability to cripple the business.

The second area that gives pause for concern is that [excepting current results which are understated] the Income Statement has been overstated. The discrepancy arises within the discretionary cashflows associated with CapEx. Some $362 Million are available at managements discretion to allocate to “pump” the earnings. This accounts for $0.23/share and the $0.04/share in earnings discrepancy over five years.

Actually compared to some of the outright “theft” that occurs on other financial statements, the accounts are some of the cleanest that I’ve ever seen.

Depreciation has matched Revenues and indicates that reserve figures should be as accurate as reserve figures can be, never an exact science in oilfields. Re-investment and maintanence has exceeded depreciation charges, with replacement of reserves.

Returns to capital have been extraordinary. Profit margins averaging 12.5%, including the weak pricing of the last recession. Returns to have obviously jumped with the price spike enjoyed this year, but nonetheless, over time have been remarkably consistent. Dividends have compounded at a 24% rate.

The price spike also preserved reserves. There has been a significant drop in the amount of reserves accessed this year [during the huge run-up] and for a longer term outlook, this is a positive.

The calculated intrinsic value I have at $197-$265/share, which is far below the current market.

In summary, it is only the weakness in the Balance Sheet and Current Ratio that puts me off. The management would seem to have performed an excellent stewardship. Thus I shall complete an analysis of both CVX & XOM and finally a comparative analysis of all three. It may be that buying a partial position in all three might be an idea.


jog on
duc

 

[Mr J]

lol ... who the heck is gonna pay you 2/20 + lockdown ... industry averages are like 0.5-1.0% + free flight ... 99% of funds don't ever go over 1%. You've been reading to many newbie investment books. hahah ... You're dreaming ... living in a fantasy world. Those days are gone. :nuts:

You can charge whatever you want providing the performance is good enough.

 

[tech/a]

Property is hardly exceptional.

Could be said of all initial investments.

How you structure investments will see either so-so return (the majority who invested in no or 1 IP) or spectacular those who have multiple holdings with low exposure and still building their portfolio.

1 short SPI contract is pretty un impressive unles you had it at 6700 and bought a couple more on the way down and sold out at 3300.

Or
50,000 FLX
It becomes exceptional if you had them at 26c and sold out at $20.

That of course is another/next topic.

 

[Temjin]

2% on 10-100 mill.
20% incentivefee.
Proven track record of the 30% return.

Vast difference between dreaming and doing Ducster.

Just a bit of corrections.

But yes, I have been following CTAs from various brokers over the past 2 years and I can assure you that getting even to the first $10 million under management (especially for the newer funds with little track record) is NOT AN EASY TASK at all.

The one that I considered the best so far has only managed $15-$18 million over the past 3 years with a very respectable return / drawdown. (though he specially change the subscription rule from $250k min to $500k min due to soaring demands, perhaps that's limiting his fund under management growth)

Anyway, I also agree that drawdown is the biggest appeal to insitutional investors, which are where most of the money comes from when managing hedge funds.

lol ... who the heck is gonna pay you 2/20 + lockdown ... industry averages are like 0.5-1.0% + free flight ... 99% of funds don't ever go over 1%. You've been reading to many newbie investment books. hahah ... You're dreaming ... living in a fantasy world. Those days are gone

That shows that you know very little about the hedge funds industry, especially managed futures. Newbie investment books don't mention a single word about these niche products because they are totally out of bound for them.

Note 2/20 is only a rule of thumb. CTAs may charge a different rate depending on the structure of the fund and potential return/risk, or length of track record. You may see 3/30 on even some of them, ridicious, yes, but you will be surprised how many people do invest in those funds for the potential reward.

These are EXCEPTIONAL investment vehicles for the REAL rich, not your typical "industry average" managed funds for poor mums and dads.

 

[matty2.0]

Originally Posted by tech/a View Post

2% on 10-100 mill.
20% incentivefee.
Proven track record of the 30% return.

Vast difference between dreaming and doing Ducster.

Just a bit of corrections.


That shows that you know very little about the hedge funds industry, especially managed futures. Newbie investment books don't mention a single word about these niche products because they are totally out of bound for them.

Note 2/20 is only a rule of thumb. CTAs may charge a different rate depending on the structure of the fund and potential return/risk, or length of track record. You may see 3/30 on even some of them, ridicious, yes, but you will be surprised how many people do invest in those funds for the potential reward.

These are EXCEPTIONAL investment vehicles for the REAL rich, not your typical "industry average" managed funds for poor mums and dads.

"That shows that you know very little about the hedge funds industry"

lmao ... you don't realize how funny that sounds to me ... honestly. You crack me up buddy, big time. I applaud your macho-ness however.

Mate everyone wants to be the next cohen, paulson, soros, druckenmiller, simons, griffin et al, I hear it over and over and over again ... heck! i don't even think they charge that much after they have large AUM ... fees get reduced once large fum is realized.

But nearly all wanna-be's really end up like this:


You should honestly not delude yourself.
But since you're a dreamer, I'll let you dream on.
Yes you my friend, my macho-man, can be a hero ... "just for one day ...." HIT IT! ---> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQFuNHCMF2Y

But don't let me stop you from dreaming. This is after all ... the "exceptional wealth idea" thread, whatever that means. You are EXCEPTIONAL you are the REAL rich, and you are "not your typical "industry average" poor mum and dad. Forgive me for sire ... for being a rude smart-ass.
Don't let me burst your bubble.
I say ... fight for your dreams dammit!! *Matty pounds his fist on the table* ... and don't let anybody else tell you otherwise! *Matty points a finger and hand to the sky and screams "Fight, fight ... fight"! Pumping his fists with emotion and enthusiam

I dedicate this song to you my friend:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYojs78Tf9Y

Dream on.