The message you're trying to access has been removed from the boards.
The most likely reason for this is that the message violated our Fool's Rules about appropriate content.
Either that or it was swallowed up by intergalactic space beasts from the planet Xeenu.
Please check out The Motley Fool's Terms and Conditions of Service.
A couple of old quotes come to mind: " a sucker is born every minute", and " you can't con an honest man".The con in the article you cited is different than getting conned on the street,the leaders probably wore nice suits, were well groomed and articulate. But theyare more dangerous to a persons wealth than any street criminal. Pretty much everybody I know from work that retired handed over their retirement moneyto an investment firm. When I would ask them simple questions like how much they'll bepaying in fees, is the advisor charging a fixed percentage for assets under management,are they buying and selling from a family of funds and if so what are the transaction costs,all of these questions were brushed off, usually with a comment that everybody else thatretired from our company uses this investment firm, so they must be good.I did go to the Christmas party/investment pitch at a local distillery that the investmentfirm threw. Free drinks and a chance to catch up outside of work with a lot of people, it wasa fun couple of hours.
...all of these questions were brushed off, usually with a comment that everybody else thatretired from our company uses this investment firm, so they must be good.I've asked several retired friends the converse question: why don't they want to direct their own funds instead of spending a fee for a company to give you back your money in installments. The answers have always been along the lines of "I like getting the same amount of $ every month" (until the fee structure resets next year in many cases) or "it's easier to have a company manage my money" and the like. These are generally very intelligent people otherwise so I chalk it up to lack of familiarity and education in money matters and a bit of laziness, too.Pete
From the linked article in the OP: "And why invest in a private company? The US Stock Exchange lists more than 3,500 companies covering all types of ventures and businesses, from household names to confusing ones." ===========================It all depends on the nature of the business and its prospects. My biggest, or 2nd-biggest holding, is stock in a locally-owned bank in a fast-growing suburban area in a nearby city. It was incorporated in the year 2000, and my father was one of the original shareholders, as was my sister #3. Dad died 5 years ago, in 2016, at which point the stock had tripled in value. So that's a 200% return in 16 years, which sounds terrific, but it's less than 10% per year, compounded. The stock is not publicly traded, but the bank holding company unofficially makes it their policy to make a market in their stock for people who want to sell. When Dad died, my sister #1 and I bought his shares from his estate, as the other siblings were not interested in it. We were also the executors of the estate, so our lawyer made a project out of dealing with the conflict of interest. (She had to do something. I did most of the real work.) Since then the stock has gone up another 50% in 5 years, which doesn't sound great considering what the stock market has done the last year. But you put that together and it's a stock that's worth 5 times original cost in a 20-year period. And the annual increases have not been volatile at all. It may be a private company, but it's worked out better than Merrill Lynch or Sears Roebuck.Bill
It may be a private company, but it's worked out better than Merrill Lynch or Sears Roebuck.</snip>My benchmark is the S&P500 with dividends reinvested, a low-hassle path to wealth.intercst
Opinion: Retirees wiped out and lose millions: How do you stumble upon some of this stuff? My question isn't to the content but to the author.I was struck by the high number of typos in such a publication, such as, "No matter how good the pitch is, why deposit money with a stranger or a stranger?"So I decided to check out the source and this is what is printed under the "About Us" section:Jioforme.com, the pioneer of news sources & operates under the philosophy of keeping its readers informed of what’s happening out there. Jioforme.com offers fresh, compelling content that’s useful and informative for its readers. We delivers the latest updates on national and international issues with photo, audio and video. It strives to be very accurate by leaving no stone unturned as it digs into the heart of every story on the local as well as international level.Besides its comprehensive news coverage and updates timely manner, we offers wide range of extraordinary insights...Utilizing a vast network of strategically situated correspondents all over World, Jioforme.com is at the vanguard of every breaking news story that matters most to the common man.--------------Reads like it was written by someone that used a poor English translator - with a crazy amount of hyperbole that would never be found in a legit news site.https://www.scamadviser.com/check-website/jioforme.comThe owner of the website is using a service to hide their identity om WHOISThis website is (very) young. Registered less than a year ago.This website is young but a lot of traffic-------------What I find interesting is the same article is posted to the more respected and well known Marketwatch.com - but without many of the same typos and with the Author's name published.https://www.marketwatch.com/story/retirees-wiped-out-lose-mi...Why would I ever entrust my money to a stranger, or an unknown company, no matter how good the pitch?-----------My guess is that the site you linked is trying to take credit for Brett Arends work, even down to the photo used in the article. How you came across such an obscure site for this article instead of Marketwatch (or Bloomberg Law, where I also found it) is rather strange.You should probably remove your post since it appears to be essentially promoting plagiarism by the "admin" of that unknown site. I email Mr. Arends to let him know his work might be plagiarized.
Hawkwin asks,How do you stumble upon some of this stuff? My question isn't to the content but to the author.</snip>It's actually an article from CBS MarketWatch, but since MarketWatch is now behind a paywall, I did a google search on the title of the article to see if I could come up with a free link that people could read.Perhaps the "spoof site" operator is adding the typos and grammar mistakes to evade the "copyright detectives"?intercst
There are a number of sites that steal data from legitimate web sites and publish it on their site. Bizarrely I was just researching this because a person in another tmf group also posted a link to another likely stolen articke.
There are a number of sites that steal data from legitimate web sites and publish it on their site. Bizarrely I was just researching this because a person in another tmf group also posted a link to another likely stolen articke. </snip>A lot of times I'll see an article in the WSJ (behind the paywall), and if you google the title, it will show up in USA Today or a similar outlet that licenses week old news for filler.intercst
It's actually an article from CBS MarketWatch, but since MarketWatch is now behind a paywall, I did a google search on the title of the article to see if I could come up with a free link that people could read.Perhaps the "spoof site" operator is adding the typos and grammar mistakes to evade the "copyright detectives"?intercstFor Apple users, you can access Market Watch articles for free via the News App.BB
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |