Lateral-g Forums - Investing 102

Lateral-g Forums (https://www.lateral-g.net/forums/index.php)

- Off Topic Forums (https://www.lateral-g.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=19)

- - Investing 102 (https://www.lateral-g.net/forums/showthread.php?t=34700)

That's a good solid plan Bob.... NLY is a terrific payer... but IF -- Big IF -- the interest rates start climbing -- the dividend will get eaten alive with a drop in share price. Of course that's hard to predict when and where and how much etc -- but JNK -- NLY -- HYG -- these are very mortgage interest rate sensitive.... and the banks are going to start to jack up the mortgage rates if houses keep selling like they have been. What remains to be seen is if the sales are really localized regionally or are they broad based.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 96z28ss (Post 470297)

I sold the rest of my NLY last week and added to my NNN.

What I like about NNN (National Retail Properties) is that they're a big box retail lease outfit. They're not leasing to mom and pop operations.... so the rents come in on time and the leases (the buildings) get taken care of. They have quite a good list of big box stores. In a good economy or bad -- most big box stores don't just fold up the tent. Even if a big box retailer scales back - they might close a store but they're still obligated to pay the lease. This has been a good name for a long time and as a REIT is obligated to pass through the bulk of the profit.

What I picked up from this article is that "most" or "many" have their net worth (outside of the primary residence value) INVESTED in the equities (stock) market.

http://www.nbcnews.com/business/risi...ires-1C8865668

Good little read... stay the course people... invest that "extra" money wisely, and dont blow it on stupid crap. lol

Another sneaky one is CVX! Wow! I bought some shares on 1/31/2012 at $103.39 and collected 5 dividends since then! Total return is about 20% in a year!

Quote:

Originally Posted by bdahlg68 (Post 470451)

Another sneaky one is CVX! Wow! I bought some shares on 1/31/2012 at $103.39 and collected 5 dividends since then! Total return is about 20% in a year!

another one of my core items. I purchased a little later, and then purchased some more on their big "dip"... im at around 12.5% paper gain + a few dividends.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bdahlg68 (Post 470451)

Another sneaky one is CVX! Wow! I bought some shares on 1/31/2012 at $103.39 and collected 5 dividends since then! Total return is about 20% in a year!

Quote:

Originally Posted by toy71camaro (Post 470453)

another one of my core items. I purchased a little later, and then purchased some more on their big "dip"... im at around 12.5% paper gain + a few dividends.

We have some serious investors here! Soon they'll be known as the "millionaires next door"!

Way to keep at it guys! Seriously.... this is the way it gets done!

Just please remember that the way to get 'er done is to not give up when the chips are DOWN.... That is when the smart guys buy more. They suffer - but then they're made whole -- and make money.

How does SIAL look to you guys?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tony_SS (Post 470543)

How does SIAL look to you guys?

Personally --- I've never heard of it.... It might be a great name.... But I don't invest in stuff I know nothing about.

Investors, here's an excerpt from The Intelligent Investor that really slaps you upside the head when we think to deviate from the rules in Investing 101...

Quote:

Nearly all the richest people in America trace their wealth to a concentrated investment in a single industry or even a single company (think Bill Gates and Microsoft, Sam Walton and Wal-Mart, or the Rockefellers and Standard Oil). The Forbes 400 list of the richest Americans, for example, has been dominated by undiversified fortunes ever since it was first compiled in 1982.

However, almost no small fortunes have been made this way - and not many big fortunes have been kept this way. What Carnegie neglected to mention is that concentration also makes most of the great failures of life. Look again at the Forbes "Rich List." Back in 1982, the average net worth of a Forbes 400 member was $230 million. To make it onto the 2002 Forbes 400, the average 1982 member needed to earn only a 4.5% average annual return on his wealth - during a period when even bank accounts yielded far more than that and the stock market gained an annual average of 13.2%

So how many of the Forbes 400 fortunes from 1982 remained on the list 20 years later? Only 64 of the original members - a measly 16% - were still on the list in 2002. By keeping all their eggs in the one basket that had gotten them onto the list in the first place - once-booming industries like oil and gas, or computer hardware, or basic manufacturing - all the other original members fell away. When hard times hit, none of these people - despite all the huge advantages that great wealth can bring - were properly prepared.

Although it speaks about the un-sustainability of over-concentrating, it also shows that wealth is not about striking it rich, but is really about having the intelligence to grow money over time. I suppose that's the point GW keeps making regarding luck. Luck is certainly a part of the equation to get rich "quickly" and "easily"... but it's only the kindling. Turning riches into wealth takes intelligence and time.

Stay the course!

GW, I'm rooting for you on the 400 list!