larrymoencurly said:InsuranceExpert said:larrymoencurly said:InsuranceExpert said:If nothing else, I have to admire your imagination. I'm looking for anything that remotely even hints of rage in any of my posts. The "snide" remark was a serious question because I was failing and am still failing to see how you had trouble understanding what I said and a Venn diagram as drawn made it crystal clear.

My guess is that you have the presumption that all sales people are bad and fighting against the world, so you find these traits when they don't exist.Your obsession with this thread, for one.

You may have meant:

(financial advice) ⊃ (investment advice)

but when you said, "It's very easy to confuse investment advice with financial advice. They aren't the same thing", you actually said:

(investment advice) ∧ (financial advice) = 0Can you translate this into English?Yes. Can you?

I can't. It's suprising that it isn't clear to you since I both asked for an English translation and said, "I was serious that I have no idea what she/he is saying."

I don't have any problem admitting that I don't know something. A translation for those of us who don't understand what you wrote would be apprectiated.

InsuranceExpert said:larrymoencurly said:InsuranceExpert said:larrymoencurly said:InsuranceExpert said:If nothing else, I have to admire your imagination. I'm looking for anything that remotely even hints of rage in any of my posts. The "snide" remark was a serious question because I was failing and am still failing to see how you had trouble understanding what I said and a Venn diagram as drawn made it crystal clear.

My guess is that you have the presumption that all sales people are bad and fighting against the world, so you find these traits when they don't exist.Your obsession with this thread, for one.

You may have meant:

(financial advice) ⊃ (investment advice)

but when you said, "It's very easy to confuse investment advice with financial advice. They aren't the same thing", you actually said:

(investment advice) ∧ (financial advice) = 0Can you translate this into English?Yes. Can you?
I can't. It's suprising that it isn't clear to you since I both asked for an English translation and said, "I was serious that I have no idea what she/he is saying."

I don't have any problem admitting that I don't know something. A translation for those of us who don't understand what you wrote would be apprectiated.You're asking me to translate what you said. Draw a Venn diagram for me.

FuzzyWombat said:Well then you probably know a great portfolio for long term returns with less risk if you are beating the market by 7%, please share?

Always beating the market by 7%? Probably not, just so happens in this 10 year period, but they do beat the market by 3-7% (long term)pretty much most of the time. I have posted portfolios here before. You can search my posts and you will find 3 or 3 specific portfolios.

larrymoencurly said:mikef07 said:The second issue I have is that the notion that sales people are bad. 99% of the most successful people are the best sales people. The best lawyers are the best sales people. they either sell a jury, a company, a judge, etc. The most successful doctors are the best sales people. They know how to talk to their patients, the hospitals, etc. Maybe 99% of the financially most successful doctors are the best sales people, but I find it hard to believe that dermatologists who concentrate on frivolous skin treatments for the affluent are better doctors than plastic surgeons who specialize in accident patients. And surgeons tend to fall short on personality and empathy, especially compared to pediatricians. But the practitioners who are the best sales people may be the outright quacks, like chiropractors, homeopaths, and naturpaths.

mikef07 said:The best engineers are the best sales people. They can sell their projects, etc. Find me a successful person in their industry and 99% of the time they are the best sales person.No, definitely no! And they often majored in engineering management, not pure engineering, with its greater math requirements. Or worse, they're architects (i.e., failed engineers who are failed artists).

Beware of sales people and their admirers.

I have worked with enough engineers to tell you the ones that were the most successful were the ones who could sell their projects to management. As far as doctors go I know what you are saying, but most people are working for 1) pay and 2) movement upward in theior career. Those who can sell their ideas, projects, products, etc. are going to be the ones achieveing those goals. Surgeons are on the same field though. A surgeon who is a great salesperson is going to do better (financially) than one who does not.

I have no doubt that there are people who get hired, promoted, raises, etc. are sometimes less talented than the people who do get those thing. They just are better sales people and tend to sell themselves better. 99% of successful people are the best salespeople in their very specific field. Even the doctor who does studies and works in academics has to sell his ideas/techniques to the private world so that other doctors accept those practices.

I have to disagree with the "successful people are great salesmen" idea. Good salesmen and successful people have a few traits in common in that they're all driven, self-motivated, and persistent. One thing VERY different between the two is being a successful person usually require more brain power than simply being a great salesperson.

Those doctors and engineers you referenced are great salespeople in pitching their skills and often times stand by what they sell. Most "successful" salesmen are just in it to make a quick buck on commission then disappear before the faulty product breaks down.

Most "successful" salesmen are just in it to make a quick buck on commission then disappear before the faulty product breaks down.

That happens sometimes, but that's not the way to be successful. The best salesmen get tons of repeat business and referrals. The easiest way to get repeat sales and referrals is to always do what is in the clients' best interest.

puckah18 said:When you reference returns at the same level of risk yet you post % returns, that tells me that you're just touting total return and not risk-adjusted return. If you're not talking about risk-adjusted returns then please don't compare "total stock return" vs "your hand picked cream of the crop managers," because they're on a different playing field.

Post Treynor or Sharpe if you want to say "my manager out performed on a risk adjusted basis." I'm not saying it can't be done, but I just don't think you're structuring your arguments in the right way.

Huh? Risk adjusted treturns would mean it is even more skewed. Total Stock Market return over the past 10 years is -1.3% with a std deviation (if you want to use this risk measurement) of around 16.61.

A person would put together a portfolio to diversify and minimize risk hoping to at least get the same return with less risk, or better yet a slight increase in return with less risk.

Looking at some of the portfolios I have seen here and even on bogleheads they are seeing better returns with slightly more risk (for example 2% return with a 19.00 std deviation) which is fine. Where I run into problems with people saying just do it yourself and don't use aprofessional is that a good professional could not only mimimize your risk even more, but could have gotten you better returns. A good portfolio would have returned around 5% with a std deviation of 16.5 or so. So for a person to say that a financial planner brings nothing to the table since you can do it on your own I completely disagree. Get a good financial planner and they are worth their weight in gold. So again the risk adjusted return is even more skewed towards a good portfolio since the risk is less and you are still over 6% better than a total stock market fund annually.

I did not use a handpickewd manager. I used a readily available portfolio that anyone could do, but was actually developed by professionals. This is why I don't necessarily think it is wrong to use a good financial planner. My own personal portfolio is up over 4% over 10 years with a std deviation of 19. Mine was designed by a professional with my risk assessment in mind.

mikef07 said:.......When you reference returns at the same level of risk yet you post % returns, that tells me that My own personal portfolio is up over 4% over 10 years with a std deviation of 19. Mine was designed by a professional with my risk assessment in mind.

designed by professional ---- wip dee doo

this isn't rocket science, and it isn't an Amway meeting where the key to success is hidden, but if you buy in, you will retire early

if you got a good method for allocating your assets, share it --- and don't tell me your guy got a secret
recipe

many participants in FWF discussions in '08 saved a whole decade of returns by going conservative and throwing models in the toliet --- did your financial planner move you out of the market prior to the crash?

mikef07 said:....He did however move me away from two funds at the beginning of the year that would have me showing around 12% returns for the year into two funds that are around 25% for the year with absolutely no more risk whatsoever.....

good call on his market timing of those funds

but you are talking hypothetical risk --- if the market continued in the tank ... those 12% funds may be outperforming those 25% funds

and there is no way you can say for sure what those 12% funds would have done versus the 25% funds if the market was flat from the March lows with no bounce

....

puckah18 said:..... When people tell me they minimize fees in investments with Vanguard but then switches their asset allocations tactically on every fart the Wall Street Journal puts out, they're doing it all wrong .....

there is nothing wrong with putting a portfolio on automatic quarterly rebalance if that's what people want to do, and you don't need a financial advisor to do that

and moving out of the market based upon information that is staring in you the face for months (like a collapsing housing market and a disappering investment banking world that was occuring before the crash) is not every fart that the Wall Street Journal puts out --- it was a reason to go active on your passive portfolio

those that who broke out of their passive model and ran for the hills in the middle of '08 weren't doing it all wrong, they played it exactly right