Wow, investing advice and free psycho analysis too.
I hope you know now that my comments were directed at the very real dangers of anyone, not just you, betting the farm on one stock.
Had me fooled, seemed very specific to me. Since I don't advocate the position, I don't see the need to protect others, but it is thoughtful.
Did you read what I wrote? I SOLD. I did take money off the table ...
Frank it is your money and your retirement and you can do anything you want with it. You don't need to defend your investing style to anyone but yourself. IMO, all of what you have posted to me is just that; trying to convince yourself that it is not VERY risky to be doing something that you and Chris would NEVER recommend that your clients do.
I did read that you sold and you believed (dare I say rationalized) that meant you took money off the table and it was part of your "exit plan" and you were waiting on NOK good news to sell most of your position, etc., etc. First of all, you didn't really take the money off the table. You put it right back into the only stock you own .. the one you are betting on to make your retirement dreams come true. Also, although you didn't state so explicitly you implied that you would look for another "strongly" positive risk/reward ratio to bet the farm again. Every investor looks for stocks with strongly positive risk reward ratios. The difference is that they don't invest all of their money in one of them. You can claim that your hedge against suffering the fate you unequivocally and forcefully warn your clients about is your "rational and open-minded" DD but methinks you are having a tough time convincing your inner-self of that.
Yesterday John Daly admitted that he has a gambling addiction that has caused him to lose $60 million and will likely take him down for good. Here are some of his comments about his other problems" .. "I don't drink Jack Daniels anymore" (John, switching your choice of alcoholic beverage does not mean that you are now clean and sober.) "I don't trash hotel rooms as much anymore." (John, trashing even one hotel room means that you still have anger management problems.) "If I didn't have this gambling problem I would have everything else under control." (No comment necessary.) I certainly am not suggesting you are anything like John Daly but you MIGHT just be in denial as he clearly has been for years.
I'm sorry, but the fact is I did take money off the table. Period. You are reading so much into this and delving into my mind and motivations when you know almost nothing about me that I will just restate the fact - I sold.
I am responding not to convince myself, but to defend myself from being painted as a wild compulsive gambler. Your posts may be to open my eyes to the real me, but that could be accomplished through a PM. Or it could be to discredit me and my opinion. I hope that was not your conscience intent, but maybe subconsciously you are trying to discredit me to “win” the debate. (Yeah, my pseudo psycho analysis is pretty lame too.)
I thought we had cleared up your misunderstanding of how I view analysts and institutions but apparently not. NO analyst is worthy of respect by default. They need to earn respect like every other person in the world. In the end if they don't get respect they don't get a paycheck at least for being an analyst.
You say you do not assume all analysts are superior, yet short of not longer getting a paycheck what would bring you to ever openly criticize an analyst’s opinion? Tell me one analyst you think does a poor job.
DDs comment: Investing is not an art but it sure isn't a science either. Those who believe that they know how to make it one and are willing to put themselves in a position where they can't afford to be wrong will end up being wrong on a percentage basis that correlates quite well with the losing percentages of gamblers.
Count's response: Interesting, but I find it hard to believe there is actual research on this. If you are talking about speculators who day trade or play options you are right. If you talk about one who invests disproportionately in one stock and holds it, I would be surprised by those results.
Wow, you really do believe everything MUST be supported by audited numbers LOL. Not for one second did I think you would take my comment as anything but a guess and assertion. Who in their right mind would ever take the time to conduct such "actual research" leaving aside the difficulty of doing so. To prove what? That addiction comes in many flavors. FWIW the above assertion comes from someone who spent 25 years rubbing elbows with investors of all types and who knows all to well how risky an imprudent investment style it can be. As I said it is your money and you sure don't owe me an explanation about how you invest it. But I've seen way too many lives ruined by folks who bet the farm on one stock and held it for me to worry too much about pinpointing whether they or traditional gamblers have a higher percentage that suffer such a fate.
The bolded comment does not sound like an opinion, sounds pretty darn factual to me. Glad you clarified that it is your opinion. Yes, I like facts, tangibles and fundamentals. I'll leave the trusting, intangibles and gut feelings to you.
I'll conclude with these thoughts.
You are right, having money invested in a diversified portfolio is the prudent choice and will have the superior return given equal risk when comparing a large sample. Anyone still reading these long winded (and boring to anyone but me and you) posts should understand that you are right that putting a highly concentrated amount of your investments in one stock is not prudent.
I also agree that you are quite wise to have your money managed professionally. You will likely generate a good return and almost absolutely avoid any loss that would materially hurt you financially. Good for you.
You are successful, financially secure and very smart. I wish you all the best, especially with the one stock that you've selected for you portfolio.
Frank
AI
