[Matt4Member@matt4Join Date: 2003Post Count: 15]

January 12, 2012 - 8:38 am

Doesn’t the calculation imply you need every cent of your current income to survive? ie, assumes you aren’t saving any of it

I could double my wealthscore by taking a job that paid half as much as my current one

[Matt4Member@matt4Join Date: 2003Post Count: 15]

November 17, 2003 - 12:57 pm

…….or ‘aura’

[Matt4Member@matt4Join Date: 2003Post Count: 15]

November 8, 2003 - 11:20 am

i resorted to cheating [}] and found an answer at the bottom of this page;

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2000/20000802/mailbag.htm

[]

[Matt4Member@matt4Join Date: 2003Post Count: 15]

November 6, 2003 - 4:32 pm

Very interesting

But i don’t think that much has changed except public perception. ie. we are now more ‘scared’ than ever because of media hype. eg. society is probably not more violent but we are more aware of violence and therefore we are not as carefree as the good old days

That’s sorta what this book talks about;

http://www.boondocksnet.com/cb/apfh-item_id-0465014909-search_type-AsinSearch-locale-us.html

[Matt4Member@matt4Join Date: 2003Post Count: 15]

November 2, 2003 - 6:28 am

Hi Ziffel,

I work in an insolvency firm so should be able to help you []

Your bankruptcy only applies to all personal debt as at the date of the trustee’s appointment. So, the only debts you need to worry about now are those incurred after the date of bankruptcy. (ie, you shouldn’t have any ‘past/unknown’ debts)

As for your credit rating, i am pretty sure that a record of your bankruptcy will stay for 5 years after the date of discharge.

Matt

[Matt4Member@matt4Join Date: 2003Post Count: 15]

October 14, 2003 - 6:20 am

by holding the stop button in and then letting go when the colour changes i managed .13

without cheating like this i can’t beat .19

Matt

[Matt4Member@matt4Join Date: 2003Post Count: 15]

October 13, 2003 - 9:21 am

.22

little bro got .21

i think age is a factor!

Matt

[Matt4Member@matt4Join Date: 2003Post Count: 15]

October 6, 2003 - 12:39 pm

Music is even more exciting then investing!

Everything has it’s place, but some of the best stuff ever comes from The Doors, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Metallica, Soundgarden (+ anything with Chris Cornell), Jeff Buckley, Jeff Beck, The White Stripes, Eric Clapton, Dream Theatre, Faith No More (+ all other Mike Patton stuff), Hendrix, Queen, Nick Cave, Alice in Chains, Black Sabbath, Jamiroquai, Dave Matthews Band, Sting/The Police, Pantera, Simon & Garfunkel/Paul Simon, Primus, John Lee Hooker, Tool, Van Morrison, The Tea Party, REM, Dire Straits, James Brown, Smashing Pumpkins, Stone Temple Pilots, Lou Reed, Nine Inch Nails, Ben Harper……etc

I know there is so much more though, and i spend my days/nights looking for it! []

[Matt4Member@matt4Join Date: 2003Post Count: 15]

September 22, 2003 - 1:56 am

crashy,

Your course sounds like it has some interesting material.

One thing I don’t believe however is that it can teach a person to return 43% p.a without taking more risk. If you can consistently do this, then you will be the richest person in the world before too long.

You could manage a fund that pays out 30% a year. This would attract billions of dollars, and the profits would be yours.

Alternatively, just invest $100,000 of your own money and settle for $127,855,892.83 in 20 years.

Matt

[Matt4Member@matt4Join Date: 2003Post Count: 15]

September 22, 2003 - 12:21 am

I think the book that everybody should read is Buffettology. If they have read it then they should read it again.

‘it’s the fundamental analysis part that i think is boring. Reading annual reports, and such.Having to have an encyclopaedic knowledge of the economy and always reading the financial section of the newspaper’

Buffettology will tell you why the world’s most successful investor takes little notice of what is in the financial section of the newspaper. He does not care about daily fluctuations in share price. Fundamental analysis is not a full time job. I think it is similar to a property purchase – 90% of the research is done before the investment. Of course if you are attempting to earn an income from shares in the short term from technical analysis and you need to analyse daily price movements there is more work involved. However this would be similar to trying to make money in daily fluctuations in a the price of a property, and you can’t tell me that you wouldn’t have your work cut out doing that. The main point here is that the more the average investor tries to ‘trade’ and make money from short term fluctations, the worse they do.

This article explains that most investors would be better keeping the shares they originally bought, instead of jumping from one thing to another;

http://www.aspectfinancial.com.au/af/news?xsl-newsID=6&xtm-licensee=aspecthuntley

‘John picks a stock to analyse it and decides it is undervalued. He puts an order in with your broker then buy stock XYZ for $1.00. The stock trades up to $1.20 in a matter of weeks. Now surely it is over-valued (How do you determine this, fundamental analysis). He sells. The stock is trading at $2.50 in 5 weeks time’

Warren Buffett does not sell the stock. He will only sell the stock if the fundamentals of the business have changed, not if the price has gone up.

‘Warren Buffett did not just buy stocks. He was the majority share holder so he could go in and build the company that’s why he is so rich. Mum & dads & average investors that use this technique cannot be majority share holders.’

I don’t think that it is fair to say that his success is based on being a majority shareholder in companies. He of course does have a controlling influence as a major shareholder, but from what I have read, he will only buy into a company that has good management and is good from a business perspective. He doesn’t try to get in there and change it. Therefore, the same returns can be had by ‘mum and dad’ investors.

A good way to find a few Buffett-style stocks is to use the search features at;

http://www.aspectfinancial.com.au

I have found it really useful, and they have a 14 day free trial on at the moment…..

And I really recommend the Buffettology book!

Matt

ps. sorry if my post is long winded or sounds like a book review…!

[Matt4Member@matt4Join Date: 2003Post Count: 15]

September 21, 2003 - 1:53 pm

insider,

I’ll have to disagree on your point that fundamental analysis does not work. Warren Buffett has done ok for himself. I think you have simplified fundamental analysis into the idea that stocks are merely bought and sold based on there ‘value’. Followers of fundamental analysis seek to buy the right shares at the right price. A stock being undervalued is only half of it.

Also, a few people have said that shares are boring!? I must be some kind of freak then because i think they can be very exciting. Shares allow you to buy into some amazing techologies. eg if you bought ventracor or unitract a year or so ago, you have definitely not been ‘bored’.

Matt

[Matt4Member@matt4Join Date: 2003Post Count: 15]

August 26, 2003 - 3:27 am

Hi banner

I guess it is just part of the risk of property investing. Therefore effective risk management is the key – this might involve holding some cash reserves as a buffer.

Steve’s book talks about the importance of the tenants in property investing. I think his point is that the better the situation is for the tennant, the less likely they are to want to leave, and the investor therefore has less risk from that perspective.

Sorry this doesn’t read very well, but i’m sure you get what i mean.

Matt

[Matt4Member@matt4Join Date: 2003Post Count: 15]

August 25, 2003 - 11:19 am

Shane is clearly very clever

He has a razor sharp wit

I think he is going places

[Matt4Member@matt4Join Date: 2003Post Count: 15]

August 24, 2003 - 11:57 am

Hi Hareee

I notice you have posted the same thing here at the Stockcentral forum;

http://www.stockcentral.com.au/forum/machine/Forum10/HTML/002308.html

clearly you are the affiliate? you don’t seem to mention that in your post.

Matt