I'm far from loaded, but have just bought a house (200,000 still owed on it) and have 30,000 sitting in the bank (just not much of a spender). Should i pay off some of the morgage or has anyone some suggestions on how best to invest it. Another property, shares, rabo direct, etc.
30k to invest, any suggestions
You can play it safe and invest in prize bonds for a few years. If you win, great.. if not... just cash them in for the same money and try something else.
Put them in a investment fund. You can choose to protect your entire cpital, and take a small participation in the fund's profits, or of you allow for a risk to your capital, then you take a larger participation.
Other than that, invest in any companies that you believe will boom in the coming pan-European boom. (With the fall of the dollar and the world relying less and less on US resources, self-sustainability will soon turn us into providers and in the end profiteers. Investing in a company at the head of this markt revolution takes serious economic and business savvy---so get an advisor to look at trends, but also speak to some business advisors who know which way the wind is blowing.)
EG the new VRT on emissions means eco-friendly cars will sell better. So look at investing in that market (the cars, or the producers of the engines, or a retailer itself)
Other than that, invest in any companies that you believe will boom in the coming pan-European boom. (With the fall of the dollar and the world relying less and less on US resources, self-sustainability will soon turn us into providers and in the end profiteers. Investing in a company at the head of this markt revolution takes serious economic and business savvy---so get an advisor to look at trends, but also speak to some business advisors who know which way the wind is blowing.)
EG the new VRT on emissions means eco-friendly cars will sell better. So look at investing in that market (the cars, or the producers of the engines, or a retailer itself)
Other than that, invest in any companies that you believe will boom in the coming pan-European boom. (With the fall of the dollar and the world relying less and less on US resources, self-sustainability will soon turn us into providers and in the end profiteers. Investing in a company at the head of this markt revolution takes serious economic and business savvy---so get an advisor to look at trends, but also speak to some business advisors who know which way the wind is blowing.)Would you not see the falling dollar damaging exports massively?
EG the new VRT on emissions means eco-friendly cars will sell better. So look at investing in that market (the cars, or the producers of the engines, or a retailer itself)
Again, the impact will probably be minimal compared to things like currency changes, Top Gear reviews etc...
OP, if you want to be really safe knock it off the mortgage, other than that I'd throw it all in index linked funds. Our own ARW has loads written on starting investments here - http://www.arandomwalk.com/category/investing101/
This one in particular http://www.arandomwalk.com/2007/07/01/investing-101-using-etfs/
EG the new VRT on emissions means eco-friendly cars will sell better. So look at investing in that market (the cars, or the producers of the engines, or a retailer itself)
Again, the impact will probably be minimal compared to things like currency changes, Top Gear reviews etc...
OP, if you want to be really safe knock it off the mortgage, other than that I'd throw it all in index linked funds. Our own ARW has loads written on starting investments here - http://www.arandomwalk.com/category/investing101/
This one in particular http://www.arandomwalk.com/2007/07/01/investing-101-using-etfs/
You can play it safe and invest in prize bonds for a few years. If you win, great.. if not... just cash them in for the same money and try something else.
Eh, no. If you're not going to use the money then at least make sure you're going to get a guaranteed return. Prize bonds are not a healthy investment as you have no guaranteed return, and cashing them in in a few years will give you back the same amount in cash but because of the time value of money it won't have the same purchasing power.
Would you not see the falling dollar damaging exports massively?
Yeah, theoretically that's the expected outcome. The US should start producing more for themselves and relying less on the ROTW.
Eh, no. If you're not going to use the money then at least make sure you're going to get a guaranteed return. Prize bonds are not a healthy investment as you have no guaranteed return, and cashing them in in a few years will give you back the same amount in cash but because of the time value of money it won't have the same purchasing power.
Would you not see the falling dollar damaging exports massively?
Yeah, theoretically that's the expected outcome. The US should start producing more for themselves and relying less on the ROTW.
I'd def go for an index linked fund... 30k is not a lot to go to business advisor or stock picker with. With current economic and market conditions a 18month to 2 year investment should see a good return in a pan european fund. Ideally a hight div fund. There is no point in picking stocks with 30k, to get the kind of diversification required for a low risk investment would require 15-25 stocks.. you get access to 100+ with many funds.
It would be no harm in speaking to you bank and getting some advice on what fund/index tracker is best suited for you.
Good luck
It would be no harm in speaking to you bank and getting some advice on what fund/index tracker is best suited for you.
Good luck
Yeah, theoretically that's the expected outcome. The US should start producing more for themselves and relying less on the ROTW.
Exactly, but the point remains that a falling dollar ain't good news for Europe. Just look at Airbus.
Exactly, but the point remains that a falling dollar ain't good news for Europe. Just look at Airbus.
To the original poster: I am in agreement with daveirl's first recommendation of paying the lump sum off your mortgage.
This assumes that you are on a variable rate mortgage that has no penalties for such payments. If you are on a fixed rate then this is normally not allowed on such mortgages, but when the fixed term is up the same advice for variable rates applies.
If you are currently on a fixed rate, and it finishes in the next year or two, consider a decent one/two year fixed rate option. Some Credit Unions are offering 8.4% fixed over two years. Once it matures, you would then use it to pay a lump sum off.
To be honest, none of the other recommendations here are likely to give you the same guaranteed return of clearing down a portion of your mortgage. While the return from these investments would seem to be more tangible, they will pale before the amount of interest on your mortgage that you will save in the long run.<<<<This is what I mean by a guaranteed return.
This assumes that you are on a variable rate mortgage that has no penalties for such payments. If you are on a fixed rate then this is normally not allowed on such mortgages, but when the fixed term is up the same advice for variable rates applies.
If you are currently on a fixed rate, and it finishes in the next year or two, consider a decent one/two year fixed rate option. Some Credit Unions are offering 8.4% fixed over two years. Once it matures, you would then use it to pay a lump sum off.
To be honest, none of the other recommendations here are likely to give you the same guaranteed return of clearing down a portion of your mortgage. While the return from these investments would seem to be more tangible, they will pale before the amount of interest on your mortgage that you will save in the long run.<<<<This is what I mean by a guaranteed return.
€30k would get you about nine shares of Berkshire Hathaway B stock (about $4,500 each). Unfortunately, the A shares are $150k each. I'm waiting for the market to plunge (any day now) before I buy some.
30k would get you about nine shares of Berkshire Hathaway B stock (about $4,500 each). Unfortunately, the A shares are $150k each. I'm waiting for the market to plunge (any day now) before I buy some.
How much are the Z ones?
How much are the Z ones?
Put the 30k in google shares.
Just done a pretty detailed analysis of their stock price and accounting figures and even
though the stock is valued at €650 a share it is still vastly undervalued.
In 18 months it should hit the magical €1000 a share if it keeps making money the way it is.
They are making exponential profits on sales of other peoples goods.
Most amazing money making company i have ever seen.
They have no debt of any description and over half of all income is pure profit (10bn
in income last year 6bn in pre tax profits)
They are also launching an OS for mobile phones which should further boost prices
An amazing short term money maker, long term (ie longer than 5 years) the growth
will probably hit a ceiling due to their very 1 dimensional revenue stream.
That is not going to be an issue in the short term though.
Just done a pretty detailed analysis of their stock price and accounting figures and even
though the stock is valued at €650 a share it is still vastly undervalued.
In 18 months it should hit the magical €1000 a share if it keeps making money the way it is.
They are making exponential profits on sales of other peoples goods.
Most amazing money making company i have ever seen.
They have no debt of any description and over half of all income is pure profit (10bn
in income last year 6bn in pre tax profits)
They are also launching an OS for mobile phones which should further boost prices
An amazing short term money maker, long term (ie longer than 5 years) the growth
will probably hit a ceiling due to their very 1 dimensional revenue stream.
That is not going to be an issue in the short term though.
[quote=IrishMike;54645140]Put the 30k in google shares.
Just done a pretty detailed analysis of their stock price and accounting figures and even
Very interested in reading this if possible.
Thanks
Just done a pretty detailed analysis of their stock price and accounting figures and even
Very interested in reading this if possible.
Thanks
Put the 30k in google shares.
A pretty high risk investment, zero diversification, dollar/euro exchange rate risk, company with a high P/E so high growth is demanded.
Just done a pretty detailed analysis of their stock price and accounting figures and even though the stock is valued at 650 a share it is still vastly undervalued.Could you upload the analysis for us? I'd be facinated to read it.
They are making exponential profits on sales of other peoples goods.
What does this mean?
An amazing short term money maker, long term (ie longer than 5 years) the growth
will probably hit a ceiling due to their very 1 dimensional revenue stream.
That is not going to be an issue in the short term though.
So by this I take it you see growth slowing in the next five years, which should mean P/E will return to something more normal, so how come you think there's such an upside to the price in that case.
A pretty high risk investment, zero diversification, dollar/euro exchange rate risk, company with a high P/E so high growth is demanded.
Just done a pretty detailed analysis of their stock price and accounting figures and even though the stock is valued at 650 a share it is still vastly undervalued.Could you upload the analysis for us? I'd be facinated to read it.
They are making exponential profits on sales of other peoples goods.
What does this mean?
An amazing short term money maker, long term (ie longer than 5 years) the growth
will probably hit a ceiling due to their very 1 dimensional revenue stream.
That is not going to be an issue in the short term though.
So by this I take it you see growth slowing in the next five years, which should mean P/E will return to something more normal, so how come you think there's such an upside to the price in that case.
A pretty high risk investment, zero diversification, dollar/euro exchange rate risk, company with a high P/E so high growth is demanded.
Dollar euro exchange rate is not much of a short term risk for Google.
They have no suppliers and no competition so its not as if they are suddenly going to become uncompetitive.
They have gross profit margins of almost 60%.
Growth is demanded but not at the rates they are achieving.
Operating profit margin of 37.8% in 2006 34.8% in 2005 and 20.38% in 2004.
The company has $11 billion in liquid assets, an increase of $9 billion since 2004.
It has zero debt of any description.
Most amazing company ive ever seen and unlike all the .coms it not alone
has market share to validate its worth it also has the gigantic revenue streams
Could you upload the analysis for us? I'd be facinated to read it.
Will do, is going to have to be tomorrow though.
Have it saved in college.
They are making exponential profits on sales of other peoples goods.
What does this mean?
Means that Google dont actually make a good.
All they do is facilitate companies that want to advertise.
They make 99% of their revenues from advertising (those highlighted words
or those adds on the right hand side after you search in google)
They have the market completely sewn up and they know it.
So in the short term they intend to cream as much off the top as possible
and to plough it back into acquisitions, research and capital investments
in data centres, renewable electricity etc.
So by this I take it you see growth slowing in the next five years, which should mean P/E will return to something more normal, so how come you think there's such an upside to the price in that case.
You are slightly fascinated by P/E ratios dave if you dont mind me saying so.
I said that this is an amazing opportunity for someone in the short term who
wants to make some cash. Long term no business is a dead cert.
However Google have a sound business model, they almost have a complete
monopoly, they almost have unlimited cash reserves and their scope for
financing through debt is bigger than that of some small countrys!!!
Diversification with their introduction of a mobile phone platform soon
and their huge investments in data centres will see them continue
that growth in the short term at least. In the medium/long term the fact
that they rely completely on one revenue stream may hurt them.
However Microsoft still relies on PC OS's for three quarters of all its revenues.
Anyway thats just my opinion and i have been wrong about things before just
ask my girlfriend :eek:
Dollar euro exchange rate is not much of a short term risk for Google.
They have no suppliers and no competition so its not as if they are suddenly going to become uncompetitive.
They have gross profit margins of almost 60%.
Growth is demanded but not at the rates they are achieving.
Operating profit margin of 37.8% in 2006 34.8% in 2005 and 20.38% in 2004.
The company has $11 billion in liquid assets, an increase of $9 billion since 2004.
It has zero debt of any description.
Most amazing company ive ever seen and unlike all the .coms it not alone
has market share to validate its worth it also has the gigantic revenue streams
Could you upload the analysis for us? I'd be facinated to read it.
Will do, is going to have to be tomorrow though.
Have it saved in college.
They are making exponential profits on sales of other peoples goods.
What does this mean?
Means that Google dont actually make a good.
All they do is facilitate companies that want to advertise.
They make 99% of their revenues from advertising (those highlighted words
or those adds on the right hand side after you search in google)
They have the market completely sewn up and they know it.
So in the short term they intend to cream as much off the top as possible
and to plough it back into acquisitions, research and capital investments
in data centres, renewable electricity etc.
So by this I take it you see growth slowing in the next five years, which should mean P/E will return to something more normal, so how come you think there's such an upside to the price in that case.
You are slightly fascinated by P/E ratios dave if you dont mind me saying so.
I said that this is an amazing opportunity for someone in the short term who
wants to make some cash. Long term no business is a dead cert.
However Google have a sound business model, they almost have a complete
monopoly, they almost have unlimited cash reserves and their scope for
financing through debt is bigger than that of some small countrys!!!
Diversification with their introduction of a mobile phone platform soon
and their huge investments in data centres will see them continue
that growth in the short term at least. In the medium/long term the fact
that they rely completely on one revenue stream may hurt them.
However Microsoft still relies on PC OS's for three quarters of all its revenues.
Anyway thats just my opinion and i have been wrong about things before just
ask my girlfriend :eek:
Dollar euro exchange rate is not much of a short term risk for Google.Wasn't talking about the risk for them, the risk for you. Investing 30,000 in dollar denominated stock.
You are slightly fascinated by P/E ratios dave if you dont mind me saying so.Not at all! I'm just using it as an indicator that I believe people are holding it as they see it having strong growth going forward. If you agree with this then fine, but from your post I got the impression that you were in my camp that it's moving towards being a more mature lower growth company.
On the mobile phone thing, I'm convinced at this stage that American companies just 'don't get' the mobile phone market worldwide so I'm steering clear of anything in that sphere. Nothing Google has done with Android makes me change that opinion in anyway. They've neither Sony Ericsson nor Nokia on board, they've been all big on announcments and small on delivery. We all saw the hype they got when the announced OpenSocial last October and now it appears they actually haven't launched anything yet.
I see a company that's shifting from what it was about, hiring loads of MBAs, admitting it's over hired staff at points, still failing to have very many products that are sucessful despite launching loads of them, making aquisitions at massive values.
For me it's a hold at best. If the price clears $800 due to hype I'll short it.
Anyway thats just my opinion and i have been wrong about things before just
ask my girlfriend We all make wrong calls! You've done a fair bit of research, 100 times more than most who come on here telling everyone to buy AAPL and GOOG :)
You are slightly fascinated by P/E ratios dave if you dont mind me saying so.Not at all! I'm just using it as an indicator that I believe people are holding it as they see it having strong growth going forward. If you agree with this then fine, but from your post I got the impression that you were in my camp that it's moving towards being a more mature lower growth company.
On the mobile phone thing, I'm convinced at this stage that American companies just 'don't get' the mobile phone market worldwide so I'm steering clear of anything in that sphere. Nothing Google has done with Android makes me change that opinion in anyway. They've neither Sony Ericsson nor Nokia on board, they've been all big on announcments and small on delivery. We all saw the hype they got when the announced OpenSocial last October and now it appears they actually haven't launched anything yet.
I see a company that's shifting from what it was about, hiring loads of MBAs, admitting it's over hired staff at points, still failing to have very many products that are sucessful despite launching loads of them, making aquisitions at massive values.
For me it's a hold at best. If the price clears $800 due to hype I'll short it.
Anyway thats just my opinion and i have been wrong about things before just
ask my girlfriend We all make wrong calls! You've done a fair bit of research, 100 times more than most who come on here telling everyone to buy AAPL and GOOG :)
Wasn't talking about the risk for them, the risk for you. Investing 30,000 in dollar denominated stock.
Apologies didnt get what you were saying.
Not at all! I'm just using it as an indicator that I believe people are holding it as they see it having strong growth going forward. If you agree with this then fine, but from your post I got the impression that you were in my camp that it's moving towards being a more mature lower growth company.
Very true i do believe that, but not for at least 3 years.
In the meantime i think they still have huge room for growth.
Their overseas revenue streams are almost half of their revenues now,
from a start-up position just over 2 years ago.
Apologies didnt get what you were saying.
Not at all! I'm just using it as an indicator that I believe people are holding it as they see it having strong growth going forward. If you agree with this then fine, but from your post I got the impression that you were in my camp that it's moving towards being a more mature lower growth company.
Very true i do believe that, but not for at least 3 years.
In the meantime i think they still have huge room for growth.
Their overseas revenue streams are almost half of their revenues now,
from a start-up position just over 2 years ago.
I would knock it off the mortgage also as a capital repayment.
Interest repayments on mortgages tend to be higher in the early stages, so by reducing the balance outstanding, which in turn reduces repayments/or term.
This extra money freed up every month could be filtered into a regular high interest account.
Interest repayments on mortgages tend to be higher in the early stages, so by reducing the balance outstanding, which in turn reduces repayments/or term.
This extra money freed up every month could be filtered into a regular high interest account.
How much are the Z ones?
Berkshire’s Corporate Performance vs. the S&P 500
Annual Percentage Change
(1) in Per-Share Book Value of Berkshire
(2) in S&P 500 with Dividends Included
(3) Relative Results
Year ................................................... (1) ..(2).. (1)-(2)
1965 .................................................. 23.8 10.0 13.8
1966 .................................................. 20.3 (11.7) 32.0
1967 .................................................. 11.0 30.9 (19.9)
1968 .................................................. 19.0 11.0 8.0
1969 .................................................. 16.2 (8.4) 24.6
1970 .................................................. 12.0 3.9 8.1
1971 .................................................. 16.4 14.6 1.8
1972 .................................................. 21.7 18.9 2.8
1973 .................................................. 4.7 (14.8) 19.5
1974 .................................................. 5.5 (26.4) 31.9
1975 .................................................. 21.9 37.2 (15.3)
1976 .................................................. 59.3 23.6 35.7
1977 .................................................. 31.9 (7.4) 39.3
1978 .................................................. 24.0 6.4 17.6
1979 .................................................. 35.7 18.2 17.5
1980 .................................................. 19.3 32.3 (13.0)
1981 .................................................. 31.4 (5.0) 36.4
1982 .................................................. 40.0 21.4 18.6
1983 .................................................. 32.3 22.4 9.9
1984 .................................................. 13.6 6.1 7.5
1985 .................................................. 48.2 31.6 16.6
1986 .................................................. 26.1 18.6 7.5
1987 .................................................. 19.5 5.1 14.4
1988 .................................................. 20.1 16.6 3.5
1989 .................................................. 44.4 31.7 12.7
1990 .................................................. 7.4 (3.1) 10.5
1991 .................................................. 39.6 30.5 9.1
1992 .................................................. 20.3 7.6 12.7
1993 .................................................. 14.3 10.1 4.2
1994 .................................................. 13.9 1.3 12.6
1995 .................................................. 43.1 37.6 5.5
1996 .................................................. 31.8 23.0 8.8
1997 .................................................. 34.1 33.4 .7
1998 .................................................. 48.3 28.6 19.7
1999 .................................................. .5 21.0 (20.5)
2000 .................................................. 6.5 (9.1) 15.6
2001 .................................................. (6.2) (11.9) 5.7
2002 .................................................. 10.0 (22.1) 32.1
2003 .................................................. 21.0 28.7 (7.7)
2004 .................................................. 10.5 10.9 (.4)
2005 .................................................. 6.4 4.9 1.5
2006 .................................................. 18.4 15.8 2.6
Compounded Annual Gain – 1965-2006..... 21.4% ..10.4% .. 11.0%
Overall Gain – 1964-2006 .................361,156% . 6,479%
[from the Berkshire Hathaway annual report http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/2006ltr.pdf]
Share price (high) of Berkshire Hathaway A shares in dollars
(B shares introduced in 1990s are 1/30th of an A share)
1965 22
1966 27
1967 21
1968 39
1969 45
1970 47
1971 74
1972 84
1973 93
1974 76
1975 60
1976 95
1977 139
1978 189
1979 350
1980 490
1981 590
1982 775
1983 1,385
1984 1,360
1985 2,730
1986 3,250
1987 4,270
1988 5,050
1989 8,900
1990 8,725
1991 9,125
1992 11,750
1993 17,800
1994 20,800
1995 33,400
1996 35,000
1997 45,000
1998 81,000
1999 80,000
2000 55,000
2001 70,000
2002 80,000
2003 82,000
2004 95,000
2005 90,000
2006 115,000
2007 151,650
(From "Of Permanent Value" by Andrew Kilpatrick. I estimated 1996 to 2006 as I had to read them off a graph)
Berkshire Hathaway owned these shares as at 12/31/06
Shares …….. Company ……………..............……………..% Owned ...Cost $ .. Market $
……………………….............................……………………………………(in millions)
151,610,700 … American Express Company ................... 12.6 … 1,287 … 9,198
36,417,400 …..Anheuser-Busch Cos., Inc. ...................... 4.7 ……1,761 …1,792
200,000,000 ….The Coca-Cola Company ........................ 8.6 …..1,299 ….9,650
17,938,100 ……Conoco Phillips ....................................... 1.1 …..1,066 …1,291
21,334,900 ……Johnson & Johnson.................................. 0.7 …..1,250 …1,409
6,708,760 ……..M&T Bank Corporation .......................... 6.1 …….103 …..820
48,000,000 …….Moody’s Corporation .............................. 17.2 …..499 …3,315
2,338,961,000 ….PetroChina “H” shares (or equivalents)... 1.3 …..488 ….3,313
3,486,006 ………POSCO.................................................... 4.0 …..572 ….1,158
100,000,000 ……The Procter & Gamble Company ............ 3.2 ….940 …..6,427
229,707,000 ……Tesco ....................................................... 2.9 …1,340 ….1,820
31,033,800 ……..US Bancorp ............................................. 1.8 …..969 ….1,123
17,072,192 ……..USG Corp................................................ 19.0 ….536 ……936
19,944,300 ……..Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. .............................. 0.5 …..942 ……921
1,727,765 ……….The Washington Post Company .............. 18.0 ….11 … 1,288
218,169,300 ……. Wells Fargo & Company......................... 6.5 ..3,697 … 7,758
1,724,200 ……….White Mountains Insurance..................... 16.0 …369 ….. 999
……………………Others ............................................................. 5,866 … 8,315
Total Common Stocks ………………….............................. $22,995 … $61,533
[from the Berkshire Hathaway annual report http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/2006ltr.pdf]
Do not "invest" in Google shares.
I recommend you read "Buffett, The Making Of An American Capitalist" by Roger Lowenstein. It is not an exciting read, but it tells how Buffett beacme the world's richest man (projected to have $70,000,000,000 at end of 2007 and pass Bill Gates).
He set up a partnership in 1956
Charles E Peterson $5,000 (friend, Omaha)
Elizabeth B Peterson $25,000 (Charles' mother, omaha)
Doris B Wood $5000 (sister)
Truman S Wood (brother-in-law)
Daniel J Monen $5,000 (attorney friend, Omaha)
William H Thompson $25,000 (father-in-law)
Alice R Buffett $35,000 (aunt)
Warren E Buffett $100
Warren E Buffett received 25% of profits above 6%
The reason for my lengthy post is to suggest the way to increase your wealth is to invest in Berkshire Hathaway shares, and get rich slowly, and not to take a flyer in the hope of getting rich quick.
This is all you need to know
Overall Gain – 1964-2006 .................
Berkshire Hathaway ..............361,156%
S & P 500 including dividends .... 6,479%
Berkshire Hathaway Compounded Annual Gain – 1965-2006..... 21.4%
Using the "rule of 72" you will double your money every 3.3 years at that percentage increase (72 / 21.4 = 3.3)
Don't confuse price with value. It is annual increases in your net worth that matters, not what is the share price. Berkshire shares have a big price, but they are value. €30,000 at 21.4% will become €208,600 in 2018.
Berkshire’s Corporate Performance vs. the S&P 500
Annual Percentage Change
(1) in Per-Share Book Value of Berkshire
(2) in S&P 500 with Dividends Included
(3) Relative Results
Year ................................................... (1) ..(2).. (1)-(2)
1965 .................................................. 23.8 10.0 13.8
1966 .................................................. 20.3 (11.7) 32.0
1967 .................................................. 11.0 30.9 (19.9)
1968 .................................................. 19.0 11.0 8.0
1969 .................................................. 16.2 (8.4) 24.6
1970 .................................................. 12.0 3.9 8.1
1971 .................................................. 16.4 14.6 1.8
1972 .................................................. 21.7 18.9 2.8
1973 .................................................. 4.7 (14.8) 19.5
1974 .................................................. 5.5 (26.4) 31.9
1975 .................................................. 21.9 37.2 (15.3)
1976 .................................................. 59.3 23.6 35.7
1977 .................................................. 31.9 (7.4) 39.3
1978 .................................................. 24.0 6.4 17.6
1979 .................................................. 35.7 18.2 17.5
1980 .................................................. 19.3 32.3 (13.0)
1981 .................................................. 31.4 (5.0) 36.4
1982 .................................................. 40.0 21.4 18.6
1983 .................................................. 32.3 22.4 9.9
1984 .................................................. 13.6 6.1 7.5
1985 .................................................. 48.2 31.6 16.6
1986 .................................................. 26.1 18.6 7.5
1987 .................................................. 19.5 5.1 14.4
1988 .................................................. 20.1 16.6 3.5
1989 .................................................. 44.4 31.7 12.7
1990 .................................................. 7.4 (3.1) 10.5
1991 .................................................. 39.6 30.5 9.1
1992 .................................................. 20.3 7.6 12.7
1993 .................................................. 14.3 10.1 4.2
1994 .................................................. 13.9 1.3 12.6
1995 .................................................. 43.1 37.6 5.5
1996 .................................................. 31.8 23.0 8.8
1997 .................................................. 34.1 33.4 .7
1998 .................................................. 48.3 28.6 19.7
1999 .................................................. .5 21.0 (20.5)
2000 .................................................. 6.5 (9.1) 15.6
2001 .................................................. (6.2) (11.9) 5.7
2002 .................................................. 10.0 (22.1) 32.1
2003 .................................................. 21.0 28.7 (7.7)
2004 .................................................. 10.5 10.9 (.4)
2005 .................................................. 6.4 4.9 1.5
2006 .................................................. 18.4 15.8 2.6
Compounded Annual Gain – 1965-2006..... 21.4% ..10.4% .. 11.0%
Overall Gain – 1964-2006 .................361,156% . 6,479%
[from the Berkshire Hathaway annual report http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/2006ltr.pdf]
Share price (high) of Berkshire Hathaway A shares in dollars
(B shares introduced in 1990s are 1/30th of an A share)
1965 22
1966 27
1967 21
1968 39
1969 45
1970 47
1971 74
1972 84
1973 93
1974 76
1975 60
1976 95
1977 139
1978 189
1979 350
1980 490
1981 590
1982 775
1983 1,385
1984 1,360
1985 2,730
1986 3,250
1987 4,270
1988 5,050
1989 8,900
1990 8,725
1991 9,125
1992 11,750
1993 17,800
1994 20,800
1995 33,400
1996 35,000
1997 45,000
1998 81,000
1999 80,000
2000 55,000
2001 70,000
2002 80,000
2003 82,000
2004 95,000
2005 90,000
2006 115,000
2007 151,650
(From "Of Permanent Value" by Andrew Kilpatrick. I estimated 1996 to 2006 as I had to read them off a graph)
Berkshire Hathaway owned these shares as at 12/31/06
Shares …….. Company ……………..............……………..% Owned ...Cost $ .. Market $
……………………….............................……………………………………(in millions)
151,610,700 … American Express Company ................... 12.6 … 1,287 … 9,198
36,417,400 …..Anheuser-Busch Cos., Inc. ...................... 4.7 ……1,761 …1,792
200,000,000 ….The Coca-Cola Company ........................ 8.6 …..1,299 ….9,650
17,938,100 ……Conoco Phillips ....................................... 1.1 …..1,066 …1,291
21,334,900 ……Johnson & Johnson.................................. 0.7 …..1,250 …1,409
6,708,760 ……..M&T Bank Corporation .......................... 6.1 …….103 …..820
48,000,000 …….Moody’s Corporation .............................. 17.2 …..499 …3,315
2,338,961,000 ….PetroChina “H” shares (or equivalents)... 1.3 …..488 ….3,313
3,486,006 ………POSCO.................................................... 4.0 …..572 ….1,158
100,000,000 ……The Procter & Gamble Company ............ 3.2 ….940 …..6,427
229,707,000 ……Tesco ....................................................... 2.9 …1,340 ….1,820
31,033,800 ……..US Bancorp ............................................. 1.8 …..969 ….1,123
17,072,192 ……..USG Corp................................................ 19.0 ….536 ……936
19,944,300 ……..Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. .............................. 0.5 …..942 ……921
1,727,765 ……….The Washington Post Company .............. 18.0 ….11 … 1,288
218,169,300 ……. Wells Fargo & Company......................... 6.5 ..3,697 … 7,758
1,724,200 ……….White Mountains Insurance..................... 16.0 …369 ….. 999
……………………Others ............................................................. 5,866 … 8,315
Total Common Stocks ………………….............................. $22,995 … $61,533
[from the Berkshire Hathaway annual report http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/2006ltr.pdf]
Do not "invest" in Google shares.
I recommend you read "Buffett, The Making Of An American Capitalist" by Roger Lowenstein. It is not an exciting read, but it tells how Buffett beacme the world's richest man (projected to have $70,000,000,000 at end of 2007 and pass Bill Gates).
He set up a partnership in 1956
Charles E Peterson $5,000 (friend, Omaha)
Elizabeth B Peterson $25,000 (Charles' mother, omaha)
Doris B Wood $5000 (sister)
Truman S Wood (brother-in-law)
Daniel J Monen $5,000 (attorney friend, Omaha)
William H Thompson $25,000 (father-in-law)
Alice R Buffett $35,000 (aunt)
Warren E Buffett $100
Warren E Buffett received 25% of profits above 6%
The reason for my lengthy post is to suggest the way to increase your wealth is to invest in Berkshire Hathaway shares, and get rich slowly, and not to take a flyer in the hope of getting rich quick.
This is all you need to know
Overall Gain – 1964-2006 .................
Berkshire Hathaway ..............361,156%
S & P 500 including dividends .... 6,479%
Berkshire Hathaway Compounded Annual Gain – 1965-2006..... 21.4%
Using the "rule of 72" you will double your money every 3.3 years at that percentage increase (72 / 21.4 = 3.3)
Don't confuse price with value. It is annual increases in your net worth that matters, not what is the share price. Berkshire shares have a big price, but they are value. €30,000 at 21.4% will become €208,600 in 2018.
id invest in property in prague, there rents are gonna be de-regulated in 2 years time i think, and there joining the euro in ~2011, they have excellent infastructure, good level of english, good standard of education,and look to be heading for a celtic-tiger esque boom in the not to distant future, i see alot of tech/business companies starting to set up shop there also
plus you'll have a house/apartment in a nice place!
plus you'll have a house/apartment in a nice place!
id invest in property in prague, there rents are gonna be de-regulated in 2 years time i think, and there joining the euro in ~2011, they have excellent infastructure, good level of english, good standard of education,and look to be heading for a celtic-tiger esque boom in the not to distant future, i see alot of tech/business companies starting to set up shop there also
plus you'll have a house/apartment in a nice place!
your a good salesman , we were led to believe that practically every country in eastern europe would emulate what ireland,s economy has done this past 10 yrs
oh and i seriously doubt the czechs will join the euro currency by 2010 , hungary were meant to join it that time aswell , i was in budapest 2 yrs ago , asked this of someone in a bank , reply was , try 2015
2010 is just estate agent talk
plus you'll have a house/apartment in a nice place!
your a good salesman , we were led to believe that practically every country in eastern europe would emulate what ireland,s economy has done this past 10 yrs
oh and i seriously doubt the czechs will join the euro currency by 2010 , hungary were meant to join it that time aswell , i was in budapest 2 yrs ago , asked this of someone in a bank , reply was , try 2015
2010 is just estate agent talk
id invest in property in prague, there rents are gonna be de-regulated in 2 years time i think, and there joining the euro in ~2011, they have excellent infastructure, good level of english, good standard of education,and look to be heading for a celtic-tiger esque boom in the not to distant future, i see alot of tech/business companies starting to set up shop there also
plus you'll have a house/apartment in a nice place!
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
thats original!
most of the good property in eastern europe has been bought by western europeans over the last 20 years, credit is geting tighter than ever, and the unwinding global housing bubble is on the verge of taking a serious dent out of worldwide economic growth. I remember going to an overseas property exhibition a few years ago and some chap trying to sell apartments in Budapest stood there straight faced and said "Ah no, you wont have Hungarians renting these places, its way out of their price range, the hope is that wealthy international students and business people will rent them. Its not really in the hungarian culture to rent anyway, they mostly save up and buy.".............. What a salesman.
Or look at these tourist places they are throwing up around the black sea coast, sold EXCLUSIVELY to British and Irish people, they cost literally a MULTIPLE of what an equivalent bulgarian owned property nearby costs. and noone wants to rent this stuff anyway. property in Czech meanwhile had property price growth of 20% through much of the nineties, and that isnt going to continue.
this notion that eastern european countries will have a celtic tiger esque boom is a COMPLETE red herring, look at the level of GDP spent on social service by goernment, much higher thatn ireland. eastern european countries have a legacy of communism/socialism, meaning they have better health and dental care than here, often times huge pension and social welfare commitments, free child care, subsidised and social housing etc. etc. etc. We NEVER had that, and hence could have prudent budgets, lower corporation tax rates, property tax rates and CGT tax rates, couple with pro business government and low deficits. aint gonna happen in most eastern european countries, for this simple reason.... Whos going to elect a government whos going to fire half the doctors and nurses??
property is cyclical and often a good bet, not at the moment though. also the czech krone is quite volatile versus the euro.
plus you'll have a house/apartment in a nice place!
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
thats original!
most of the good property in eastern europe has been bought by western europeans over the last 20 years, credit is geting tighter than ever, and the unwinding global housing bubble is on the verge of taking a serious dent out of worldwide economic growth. I remember going to an overseas property exhibition a few years ago and some chap trying to sell apartments in Budapest stood there straight faced and said "Ah no, you wont have Hungarians renting these places, its way out of their price range, the hope is that wealthy international students and business people will rent them. Its not really in the hungarian culture to rent anyway, they mostly save up and buy.".............. What a salesman.
Or look at these tourist places they are throwing up around the black sea coast, sold EXCLUSIVELY to British and Irish people, they cost literally a MULTIPLE of what an equivalent bulgarian owned property nearby costs. and noone wants to rent this stuff anyway. property in Czech meanwhile had property price growth of 20% through much of the nineties, and that isnt going to continue.
this notion that eastern european countries will have a celtic tiger esque boom is a COMPLETE red herring, look at the level of GDP spent on social service by goernment, much higher thatn ireland. eastern european countries have a legacy of communism/socialism, meaning they have better health and dental care than here, often times huge pension and social welfare commitments, free child care, subsidised and social housing etc. etc. etc. We NEVER had that, and hence could have prudent budgets, lower corporation tax rates, property tax rates and CGT tax rates, couple with pro business government and low deficits. aint gonna happen in most eastern european countries, for this simple reason.... Whos going to elect a government whos going to fire half the doctors and nurses??
property is cyclical and often a good bet, not at the moment though. also the czech krone is quite volatile versus the euro.
The Eastern Europeans don't have the demographics we had either for the Celtic Tiger. Our fertility rate is still higher than theirs and they have no bulge of people coming along!
Is this 30k the only savings you have? In that case you'd probably want to think about having it as an emergency/rainy day fund in which case it should be kept in a high interest deposit account.
id invest in property in prague
:rolleyes:
id invest in property in prague
:rolleyes:
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
thats original!
no need to be a d|ick about it!
and who said it had to be original anyhoo!
and you rambled on about hungary, bulgaria etc
im only talking about the cezh republic, iv been over there over the past few years and have seen the changes and was only commenting on what i saw
thats original!
no need to be a d|ick about it!
and who said it had to be original anyhoo!
and you rambled on about hungary, bulgaria etc
im only talking about the cezh republic, iv been over there over the past few years and have seen the changes and was only commenting on what i saw
The Eastern Europeans don't have the demographics we had either for the Celtic Tiger. Our fertility rate is still higher than theirs and they have no bulge of people coming along!
they actually have quite a large influx of ukrainians which only started over
the last 5/6 years
they actually have quite a large influx of ukrainians which only started over
the last 5/6 years
[QUOTE=portomar;54668661] property in Czech meanwhile had property price growth of 20% through much of the nineties, and that isnt going to continue.
QUOTE]
your reasoning being....
QUOTE]
your reasoning being....
[QUOTE=portomar;54668661] property in Czech meanwhile had property price growth of 20% through much of the nineties, and that isnt going to continue.
QUOTE]
your reasoning being....
i've been over three times in the last 4 years also, what i've seen is the place go to sh1t (sorry, actually only referring to prague here actually) its a beautiful city, but since 2004, has been plastered with neon and burger bars, strip clubs and brothels. you cant seem to walk 15 feet without being accosted by someone offering you a dwarf prostitute (seriously!) or to go into a strip club. allegedly you cant hop in a taxi without being ripped off to a major degree, heard this off numerous other tourists there. train system is the same, got charged 40 for sitting in "1st class" which had no indication whatever that i was in 1st class. conveniently didnt charge the czech backpacker who had same ticket as us. the place gave me a terrible impression of the accesion states, which was thankfully quashed when i travelled further, especially to poland. prague makes warsaw and krakow look like zurich.
in relation to hungary, bulgaria, etc., fair enough, but the points made about economy and tax base hold for czech too.
also, have a stroll around the city and see how many premises are for rent... and lastly the city centre is already more expensive than a fair amount of western european cities, berlin, hamburg, and munich included. as for the 20% growth rate, because there is a global housing bubble fuelled by cheap credit in western europe, the us and japan, acutely affecting eastern europe which is about to unravel, is doing so in fact, and the pyramid of eastern european property way out of the price range of the local economy is going to unravel with it.
sorry for laughing, it just grinds my gears developers making billions off gulible irish people. lastly 30,000 wouldnt get anything in prague anymore.
QUOTE]
your reasoning being....
i've been over three times in the last 4 years also, what i've seen is the place go to sh1t (sorry, actually only referring to prague here actually) its a beautiful city, but since 2004, has been plastered with neon and burger bars, strip clubs and brothels. you cant seem to walk 15 feet without being accosted by someone offering you a dwarf prostitute (seriously!) or to go into a strip club. allegedly you cant hop in a taxi without being ripped off to a major degree, heard this off numerous other tourists there. train system is the same, got charged 40 for sitting in "1st class" which had no indication whatever that i was in 1st class. conveniently didnt charge the czech backpacker who had same ticket as us. the place gave me a terrible impression of the accesion states, which was thankfully quashed when i travelled further, especially to poland. prague makes warsaw and krakow look like zurich.
in relation to hungary, bulgaria, etc., fair enough, but the points made about economy and tax base hold for czech too.
also, have a stroll around the city and see how many premises are for rent... and lastly the city centre is already more expensive than a fair amount of western european cities, berlin, hamburg, and munich included. as for the 20% growth rate, because there is a global housing bubble fuelled by cheap credit in western europe, the us and japan, acutely affecting eastern europe which is about to unravel, is doing so in fact, and the pyramid of eastern european property way out of the price range of the local economy is going to unravel with it.
sorry for laughing, it just grinds my gears developers making billions off gulible irish people. lastly 30,000 wouldnt get anything in prague anymore.
i wasnt trying to push the usual eastern block, bulgaria, hungary property rubbish
just noticed the massive amount of building goin on on the outskirts of prague and immediatly noticed the comparisons with the cummuter belt around dublin, except that they have excellent public transport!
granted 30,000 wont get ya anything but will get u a nice house in the commuter belt towns
probly better of putting it into an investment fund
just noticed the massive amount of building goin on on the outskirts of prague and immediatly noticed the comparisons with the cummuter belt around dublin, except that they have excellent public transport!
granted 30,000 wont get ya anything but will get u a nice house in the commuter belt towns
probly better of putting it into an investment fund
probly better of putting it into an investment fund
Lads, take it easy with the arguments, nothing personal please. skelliser, if you make such a closed point, expect to have somebody disagree with you. We like to discuss people's opinions, and like you said, the OP is probably better off putting it into an investment fund rather than buying property in Prague.
Lads, take it easy with the arguments, nothing personal please. skelliser, if you make such a closed point, expect to have somebody disagree with you. We like to discuss people's opinions, and like you said, the OP is probably better off putting it into an investment fund rather than buying property in Prague.
Consider going long by investing the 30K in a JNJ DRIP for the next 10 or more years. The huge Baby Boom is aging (persons born in the USA between 1946 and 1964 or about 74 million), with markedly increasing health care needs. JNJ is the biggest and most diverse health care manufacturer, with an "A" rating from Standard & Poor. Over the past 100 years, JNJ has averaged 11% increase in stock price, with many splits over time. Plus a DRIP will fold all your cash dividends into expanding your stock position.
Lads, take it easy with the arguments, nothing personal please. skelliser, if you make such a closed point, expect to have somebody disagree with you. We like to discuss people's opinions, and like you said, the OP is probably better off putting it into an investment fund rather than buying property in Prague.
i didnt make it personal at all! why am i being told-off, i suggested a possible investment and got laughed at
i didnt make it personal at all! why am i being told-off, i suggested a possible investment and got laughed at
I hope I'm not boring the good people of Ireland. :o
THE QUESTIONS YOU NEED TO ASK WHEN BUYING SHARES.
1. DOES THE COMPANY HAVE IDENTIFIABLE CONSUMER MONOPOLIES OR BRAND NAME PRODUCTS?
2. DO YOU UNDERSTAND HOW IT WORKS?
3. IS THE COMPANY CONSERVATIVELY FINANCED?
4. ARE EARNINGS STRONG AND DO THEY SHOW AN UPWARD TREND?
5. DOES THE COMPANY ONLY ALLOCATE CAPITAL TO BUSINESSES WITHIN ITS REALM OF EXPERTISE?
6. DOES THE COMPANY BUY BACK ITS SHARES?
7. DOES THE COMPANY RETAIN EARNINGS?
8. IS THE RETURN ON SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY ABOVE AVERAGE?
9. IS THE COMPANY FREE TO ADJUST PRICES TO INFLATION?
10. DO OPERATIONS REQUIRE LARGE CAPITAL EXPENDITURES TO UPDATE PLANT AND EQUIPMENT?
EXAMPLES
1. COCA-COLA IS A BRAND NAME MONOPOLY. BETHLEHEM STEEL IS NOT.
2. IF IT IS A TECHNOLOGY COMPANY YOU PROBABLY DONT UNDERSTAND IT E.G GOOGLE.
3. DOES IT HAVE MUCH LONG-TERM DEBT?
GENERAL MOTORS DEBT IN 2005 WAS $285 BILLION; NET INCOME FOR THE TEN YEARS 1996 TO 2005 WAS $22.1 BILLION. AT THAT PROFIT RATE THEY WOULD TAKE ABOUT 130 YEARS TO PAY OFF THEIR DEBT.
4. AMERICAN EXPRESS EARNINGS PER SHARE 1990 TO 2005: (RISING NICELY) .23,.53,.28,1.06,0.89,1.04,1.30,1.38,1.54,1.81,2.07,0.98,2.01,2.31,2.74,2.56
5. COCA-COLA, WRIGLEYS, MCDONALDS, JOHNSON & JOHNSON ARE SOLID PERFORMERS THAT STICK TO WHAT THEY KNOW. COMPANIES LIKE NORTHERN ROCK DONT.
6. BUYING BACK SHARES INCREASE SHAREHOLDER VALUE. IT IS ALSO A SIGN THAT THE COMPANY IS GENERATING A LARGE AMOUNT OF CASH.
7. DIVIDENDS ARE TAXED. RETAINED EARNINGS IN A COMPANY WITH HIGH EARNINGS PER SHARE INCREASE SHARE VALUES.
8. AMGEN; AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING; ADOBE SYSTEMS HAVE HIGH RETURNS ON SHAREHOLDER EQUITY. AMERICAN MICRO DEVICES; ALCAN ALUMINIUM DONT.
9. RYANAIR PROBABLY CANNOT INCREASE PRICES WITH INFLATION, WHILE TESCO CAN.
10. GENERAL MOTORS CAPITAL EXPENDITURE IN THE 1996 TO 2005 DECADE WAS $86.3 BILLION, WHILE THEIR NET INCOME IN THAT PERIOD WAS $22.1 BILLION. IN OTHER WORDS THEY CANNOT MAKE ENOUGH PROFIT TO REPLACE MACHINERY, AND MUST BORROW HEAVILY.
WHAT YOU WANT IS A WELL KNOWN BRAND NAME WITH A MONOPOLY OF ITS MARKET, A SIMPLE PRODUCT THAT WILL NOT BECOME OBSOLETE, HAS LITTLE LONG-TERM DEBT, HAS STRONG EARNING PER SHARE WITH AN UPWARD TREND WITH FEW REVERSES, STICKS TO ITS PROFITABLE CORE BUSINESS, BUYS BACK ITS SHARES WITH ITS RETAINED EARNINGS, DOES NOT PAY DIVIDENDS (OR LITTLE), IS FREE TO ADJUST PRICES WITH INFLATION, AND DOES NOT REQUIRE LARGE CAPITAL EXPENDITURE TO CONTINUE IN EXISTENCE.
IN MY OPINION THE STOCK MARKET IS HIGH. I EXPECT THE DOW TO GO DOWN TO ABOUT 10,000 IN A COUPLE OF YEARS. I HAVE MY MONEY IN AN ETRADE ACCOUNT. THE MOST DIFFICULT THING TO DO IS TO DO NOTHING. WARREN BUFFETT (BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY) DID NOT BUY A SHARE FOR THREE YEARS WHILE WAITING FOR THE PRICES THAT MADE SENSE TO HIM.
THE QUESTIONS YOU NEED TO ASK WHEN BUYING SHARES.
1. DOES THE COMPANY HAVE IDENTIFIABLE CONSUMER MONOPOLIES OR BRAND NAME PRODUCTS?
2. DO YOU UNDERSTAND HOW IT WORKS?
3. IS THE COMPANY CONSERVATIVELY FINANCED?
4. ARE EARNINGS STRONG AND DO THEY SHOW AN UPWARD TREND?
5. DOES THE COMPANY ONLY ALLOCATE CAPITAL TO BUSINESSES WITHIN ITS REALM OF EXPERTISE?
6. DOES THE COMPANY BUY BACK ITS SHARES?
7. DOES THE COMPANY RETAIN EARNINGS?
8. IS THE RETURN ON SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY ABOVE AVERAGE?
9. IS THE COMPANY FREE TO ADJUST PRICES TO INFLATION?
10. DO OPERATIONS REQUIRE LARGE CAPITAL EXPENDITURES TO UPDATE PLANT AND EQUIPMENT?
EXAMPLES
1. COCA-COLA IS A BRAND NAME MONOPOLY. BETHLEHEM STEEL IS NOT.
2. IF IT IS A TECHNOLOGY COMPANY YOU PROBABLY DONT UNDERSTAND IT E.G GOOGLE.
3. DOES IT HAVE MUCH LONG-TERM DEBT?
GENERAL MOTORS DEBT IN 2005 WAS $285 BILLION; NET INCOME FOR THE TEN YEARS 1996 TO 2005 WAS $22.1 BILLION. AT THAT PROFIT RATE THEY WOULD TAKE ABOUT 130 YEARS TO PAY OFF THEIR DEBT.
4. AMERICAN EXPRESS EARNINGS PER SHARE 1990 TO 2005: (RISING NICELY) .23,.53,.28,1.06,0.89,1.04,1.30,1.38,1.54,1.81,2.07,0.98,2.01,2.31,2.74,2.56
5. COCA-COLA, WRIGLEYS, MCDONALDS, JOHNSON & JOHNSON ARE SOLID PERFORMERS THAT STICK TO WHAT THEY KNOW. COMPANIES LIKE NORTHERN ROCK DONT.
6. BUYING BACK SHARES INCREASE SHAREHOLDER VALUE. IT IS ALSO A SIGN THAT THE COMPANY IS GENERATING A LARGE AMOUNT OF CASH.
7. DIVIDENDS ARE TAXED. RETAINED EARNINGS IN A COMPANY WITH HIGH EARNINGS PER SHARE INCREASE SHARE VALUES.
8. AMGEN; AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING; ADOBE SYSTEMS HAVE HIGH RETURNS ON SHAREHOLDER EQUITY. AMERICAN MICRO DEVICES; ALCAN ALUMINIUM DONT.
9. RYANAIR PROBABLY CANNOT INCREASE PRICES WITH INFLATION, WHILE TESCO CAN.
10. GENERAL MOTORS CAPITAL EXPENDITURE IN THE 1996 TO 2005 DECADE WAS $86.3 BILLION, WHILE THEIR NET INCOME IN THAT PERIOD WAS $22.1 BILLION. IN OTHER WORDS THEY CANNOT MAKE ENOUGH PROFIT TO REPLACE MACHINERY, AND MUST BORROW HEAVILY.
WHAT YOU WANT IS A WELL KNOWN BRAND NAME WITH A MONOPOLY OF ITS MARKET, A SIMPLE PRODUCT THAT WILL NOT BECOME OBSOLETE, HAS LITTLE LONG-TERM DEBT, HAS STRONG EARNING PER SHARE WITH AN UPWARD TREND WITH FEW REVERSES, STICKS TO ITS PROFITABLE CORE BUSINESS, BUYS BACK ITS SHARES WITH ITS RETAINED EARNINGS, DOES NOT PAY DIVIDENDS (OR LITTLE), IS FREE TO ADJUST PRICES WITH INFLATION, AND DOES NOT REQUIRE LARGE CAPITAL EXPENDITURE TO CONTINUE IN EXISTENCE.
IN MY OPINION THE STOCK MARKET IS HIGH. I EXPECT THE DOW TO GO DOWN TO ABOUT 10,000 IN A COUPLE OF YEARS. I HAVE MY MONEY IN AN ETRADE ACCOUNT. THE MOST DIFFICULT THING TO DO IS TO DO NOTHING. WARREN BUFFETT (BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY) DID NOT BUY A SHARE FOR THREE YEARS WHILE WAITING FOR THE PRICES THAT MADE SENSE TO HIM.
I'm far from loaded, but have just bought a house (200,000 still owed on it) and have 30,000 sitting in the bank (just not much of a spender). Should i pay off some of the morgage or has anyone some suggestions on how best to invest it. Another property, shares, rabo direct, etc.
Here is some advice, which you will probably not take, but here goes anyway !
Open an account with a deep discount broker on the internet, any of them will do, just get the one with the cheapest commissions.
Go to MSN money and download their free stock analysis programme that you can run from your PC - this will give you the same details as many of the subscription services out there - forget them - the internet can give you all the information you want for free, if you are prepared to do some work and research the topic you are interested in.
Go to Yahoo finance and learn how to watch the market sectors and leaders / laggers - another free service that many pay for !
Add one and two and you have just made yourslef as good as the best analysists in Davys or Bloxhams, or any other stock broker firm.
Now, this is the important bit.
If the market has bottomed - meaning it has gone down for a period of time and stabilised, buy the leaders - not the lagers, and vice versa when the market has rallied up.
Only buy 50 shares and put a stop loss order in just below the most recent low of the stock you have picked. Ig you get stopped out, then go on to the next best candidate, but keep an eye on the one that you have just got stopped out of, for it will reverse many times for no apparent reason, but when it moves up, you can then start to move your stop loss order to lock in profits.
By the time you have lost 2,000 euro, I guarantee you that you will know more about the markets than the majority of stock brokers, for they all think Economics is a science, when in fact, it is not, as it is next to impossible to apply scientific methods to human emotions, and trading is mostly about human emotions, not balance sheets !
Have fun, and you might well thank me in years to come, when you will be able to pay off your 200,000 mortage with the money that other traders have handed to you, but remember, only 50 shares at first, and when you are winning each and every week, then you can start to increase it slowly, to 100 shares, then maybe 150, 200 (depending on the price of the stock traded) but the number of shares you buy must never exceed 1% of your available trading capital - ignore this and odds are you will lose all of your money - and in a very short time as well !
Here is some advice, which you will probably not take, but here goes anyway !
Open an account with a deep discount broker on the internet, any of them will do, just get the one with the cheapest commissions.
Go to MSN money and download their free stock analysis programme that you can run from your PC - this will give you the same details as many of the subscription services out there - forget them - the internet can give you all the information you want for free, if you are prepared to do some work and research the topic you are interested in.
Go to Yahoo finance and learn how to watch the market sectors and leaders / laggers - another free service that many pay for !
Add one and two and you have just made yourslef as good as the best analysists in Davys or Bloxhams, or any other stock broker firm.
Now, this is the important bit.
If the market has bottomed - meaning it has gone down for a period of time and stabilised, buy the leaders - not the lagers, and vice versa when the market has rallied up.
Only buy 50 shares and put a stop loss order in just below the most recent low of the stock you have picked. Ig you get stopped out, then go on to the next best candidate, but keep an eye on the one that you have just got stopped out of, for it will reverse many times for no apparent reason, but when it moves up, you can then start to move your stop loss order to lock in profits.
By the time you have lost 2,000 euro, I guarantee you that you will know more about the markets than the majority of stock brokers, for they all think Economics is a science, when in fact, it is not, as it is next to impossible to apply scientific methods to human emotions, and trading is mostly about human emotions, not balance sheets !
Have fun, and you might well thank me in years to come, when you will be able to pay off your 200,000 mortage with the money that other traders have handed to you, but remember, only 50 shares at first, and when you are winning each and every week, then you can start to increase it slowly, to 100 shares, then maybe 150, 200 (depending on the price of the stock traded) but the number of shares you buy must never exceed 1% of your available trading capital - ignore this and odds are you will lose all of your money - and in a very short time as well !
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
thats original!
most of the good property in eastern europe has been bought by western europeans over the last 20 years, credit is geting tighter than ever, and the unwinding global housing bubble is on the verge of taking a serious dent out of worldwide economic growth. I remember going to an overseas property exhibition a few years ago and some chap trying to sell apartments in Budapest stood there straight faced and said "Ah no, you wont have Hungarians renting these places, its way out of their price range, the hope is that wealthy international students and business people will rent them. Its not really in the hungarian culture to rent anyway, they mostly save up and buy.".............. What a salesman.
Or look at these tourist places they are throwing up around the black sea coast, sold EXCLUSIVELY to British and Irish people, they cost literally a MULTIPLE of what an equivalent bulgarian owned property nearby costs. and noone wants to rent this stuff anyway. property in Czech meanwhile had property price growth of 20% through much of the nineties, and that isnt going to continue.
this notion that eastern european countries will have a celtic tiger esque boom is a COMPLETE red herring, look at the level of GDP spent on social service by goernment, much higher thatn ireland. eastern european countries have a legacy of communism/socialism, meaning they have better health and dental care than here, often times huge pension and social welfare commitments, free child care, subsidised and social housing etc. etc. etc. We NEVER had that, and hence could have prudent budgets, lower corporation tax rates, property tax rates and CGT tax rates, couple with pro business government and low deficits. aint gonna happen in most eastern european countries, for this simple reason.... Whos going to elect a government whos going to fire half the doctors and nurses??
property is cyclical and often a good bet, not at the moment though. also the czech krone is quite volatile versus the euro.
agree with almost everything youve said apart from the part about spending on health here being so low
the difference in those countries is the likes of doctors and nurses and public servants in general have a sense of duty , here they have a sense of entitlement , we have massive spending on health here , the problem is , it all goes on wages( instead of beds) to surplus beaurcrats and pen pushers who like everyone in the public service here are unsackable
thats original!
most of the good property in eastern europe has been bought by western europeans over the last 20 years, credit is geting tighter than ever, and the unwinding global housing bubble is on the verge of taking a serious dent out of worldwide economic growth. I remember going to an overseas property exhibition a few years ago and some chap trying to sell apartments in Budapest stood there straight faced and said "Ah no, you wont have Hungarians renting these places, its way out of their price range, the hope is that wealthy international students and business people will rent them. Its not really in the hungarian culture to rent anyway, they mostly save up and buy.".............. What a salesman.
Or look at these tourist places they are throwing up around the black sea coast, sold EXCLUSIVELY to British and Irish people, they cost literally a MULTIPLE of what an equivalent bulgarian owned property nearby costs. and noone wants to rent this stuff anyway. property in Czech meanwhile had property price growth of 20% through much of the nineties, and that isnt going to continue.
this notion that eastern european countries will have a celtic tiger esque boom is a COMPLETE red herring, look at the level of GDP spent on social service by goernment, much higher thatn ireland. eastern european countries have a legacy of communism/socialism, meaning they have better health and dental care than here, often times huge pension and social welfare commitments, free child care, subsidised and social housing etc. etc. etc. We NEVER had that, and hence could have prudent budgets, lower corporation tax rates, property tax rates and CGT tax rates, couple with pro business government and low deficits. aint gonna happen in most eastern european countries, for this simple reason.... Whos going to elect a government whos going to fire half the doctors and nurses??
property is cyclical and often a good bet, not at the moment though. also the czech krone is quite volatile versus the euro.
agree with almost everything youve said apart from the part about spending on health here being so low
the difference in those countries is the likes of doctors and nurses and public servants in general have a sense of duty , here they have a sense of entitlement , we have massive spending on health here , the problem is , it all goes on wages( instead of beds) to surplus beaurcrats and pen pushers who like everyone in the public service here are unsackable
agree with almost everything youve said apart from the part about spending on health here being so low. the difference in those countries is the likes of doctors and nurses and public servants in general have a sense of duty , here they have a sense of entitlement , we have massive spending on health here , the problem is, it all goes on wages (instead of beds) to surplus beaurcrats and pen pushers who like everyone in the public service here are unsackable
From the HSE website -
The HSE is the largest employer employer in the state, with over 67,000 direct, and a further 35,000 employed by agencies funded by the HSE.
Staff at 31/12/2006 (from the Annual Report)
Medical/dental .................................7710
Nursing .........................................36745
Health & social care professionals ......14929
Management/administrative ..............17254 (16.2%)
General support staff ...................... 12877
Other patient & client care................16757
Total employees ............................106272
16.2% is not excessive in my opinion.
Perhaps you would let us know how many people you calculate are needed. Your post was fact free.
From the HSE website -
The HSE is the largest employer employer in the state, with over 67,000 direct, and a further 35,000 employed by agencies funded by the HSE.
Staff at 31/12/2006 (from the Annual Report)
Medical/dental .................................7710
Nursing .........................................36745
Health & social care professionals ......14929
Management/administrative ..............17254 (16.2%)
General support staff ...................... 12877
Other patient & client care................16757
Total employees ............................106272
16.2% is not excessive in my opinion.
Perhaps you would let us know how many people you calculate are needed. Your post was fact free.
Open an account with a deep discount broker on the internet, any of them will do, just get the one with the cheapest commissions.
could you suggest one? Personally would prefer something Irish but is this silly?
I would personally be looking to start small with roughly 5k euros
Sorry to go off topic..
could you suggest one? Personally would prefer something Irish but is this silly?
I would personally be looking to start small with roughly 5k euros
Sorry to go off topic..
From the HSE website -
The HSE is the largest employer employer in the state, with over 67,000 direct, and a further 35,000 employed by agencies funded by the HSE.
Staff at 31/12/2006 (from the Annual Report)
Medical/dental .................................7710
Nursing .........................................36745
Health & social care professionals ......14929
Management/administrative ..............17254 (16.2%)
General support staff ...................... 12877
Other patient & client care................16757
Total employees ............................106272
16.2% is not excessive in my opinion.
Perhaps you would let us know how many people you calculate are needed. Your post was fact free.
you think unless i supply various statistics , im not entitled to comment on the levels of administrators within the health service and the lack of efficency within the public service in general
is that what your saying MR FACTS SHEET
The HSE is the largest employer employer in the state, with over 67,000 direct, and a further 35,000 employed by agencies funded by the HSE.
Staff at 31/12/2006 (from the Annual Report)
Medical/dental .................................7710
Nursing .........................................36745
Health & social care professionals ......14929
Management/administrative ..............17254 (16.2%)
General support staff ...................... 12877
Other patient & client care................16757
Total employees ............................106272
16.2% is not excessive in my opinion.
Perhaps you would let us know how many people you calculate are needed. Your post was fact free.
you think unless i supply various statistics , im not entitled to comment on the levels of administrators within the health service and the lack of efficency within the public service in general
is that what your saying MR FACTS SHEET
you think unless i supply various statistics , im not entitled to comment on the levels of administrators within the health service and the lack of efficency within the public service in general
is that what your saying MR FACTS SHEET
I think he was pointing out that people these days seem to be strong on opinions but weak on knowledge!
is that what your saying MR FACTS SHEET
I think he was pointing out that people these days seem to be strong on opinions but weak on knowledge!
I think he was pointing out that people these days seem to be strong on opinions but weak on knowledge!
so do you disagree with me that there is surplus staff employed in the health service and the broader public service in general
do you disagree with me that there is a culture of inneficency
do you also disagree that it is nion impossible to loose your job as a public servant
so do you disagree with me that there is surplus staff employed in the health service and the broader public service in general
do you disagree with me that there is a culture of inneficency
do you also disagree that it is nion impossible to loose your job as a public servant
so do you disagree with me that there is surplus staff employed in the health service and the broader public service in general
do you disagree with me that there is a culture of inneficency
do you also disagree that it is nion impossible to loose your job as a public servant
I don't have enough knowledge to offer a useful opinion :)
Of course it's easy to assume all you suggest. How many staff should there be in the health service? I don't know, but you must. I've had few dealings with the service so can't tell how efficient or otherwise they are. Have you enough experience with them to tell? I've no idea how many, if any, public servants lose their jobs each year. What's the answer?
do you disagree with me that there is a culture of inneficency
do you also disagree that it is nion impossible to loose your job as a public servant
I don't have enough knowledge to offer a useful opinion :)
Of course it's easy to assume all you suggest. How many staff should there be in the health service? I don't know, but you must. I've had few dealings with the service so can't tell how efficient or otherwise they are. Have you enough experience with them to tell? I've no idea how many, if any, public servants lose their jobs each year. What's the answer?
off your mortgage
nuff said
nuff said
Example Unordered List
Has anybody bought propertSoc Gen
Should I cut my losses and
Sterling versus Euro.
Dow analysis
Aib Adr
financial misselling
indo shares/denis o brien
Does UBS have any credibil
Eurodollars trading. Infor
