Introducing: my brand new “idiot grandson” share portfolio

Did your friends really have to sell their home or was it just that they didn't know any better at the time?

 

Click bait to rake in extra dollars before pulling the pin?

 

Forever homes are emotional. And when you get emotional you stop thinking.

 

Depends on definition of "have to". Some family members have bought their dream home in Childers during the Gladstone mining boom, then lost their jobs once the money disappeared. Didn't have to sell it, but life would have much been much more difficult if they kept it. Others have had divorce, then realised their dream home on a big block in the outer north of Brisbane was too niche to sell at a bad time. Specific to the paying down the mortgage issue we did just this then we had to move interstate for work. Had I kept the money in an offset it would have made sense to keep and rent out, because I didn't we were much better off selling it and buying another despite the costs associated with both. These small decisions have huge ramifications which aren't always clear when you follow guides like this.

It's very coincidental that it is timed with the requirements for existing financial planners to upskill themselves or become unaccredited.

Couldn't agree more, just look at how many people die in bush fires protecting their home. Houses as an asset worry me because of the leverage and ease of access to anyone. Done well they are an awesome asset class, but easy to stuff up and go horribly wrong.

 

‘Barefoot’s Money Movement’

Scott Pape, aka the Barefoot Investor, will front a new 4 part lifestyle series Money School (Foxtel)

Since its launch in May, The Barefoot Money Movement has 8991 principals and teachers supporting the initiative, and over 2000 schools, or one in five of all Australian schools, applying to be part of the program. Pape hopes to eventually roll out to every school in Australia – beginning with a number of pilot schools this year.

 

Hmm, enthusiasm, a cause, increase in profile or a combination of all three? No idea. Sort of feel sorry for the school students (and schools). Already they are pressured by various quarters over the current curriculum and now another potential add-on.

Unless the concept grabs them, more than likely they'll be bored witless and probably ignore most of it.

 

Wicked thought. For the purpose of balance and equal access surely the schools should welcome and encourage an alternative view on investment processes. I can think of a couple of commentators who could do that one of which has been the subject of a recent discussion in the "Stock investments resources" thread.

Fair do's and all that.

 

I do hope that Pape’s “forever” portfolio is a basket of ETFs or even LICs....if he is going to recommend direct holdings to the mums and dads he has lost his bloody mind.

 

His historical recommendations before starting the silly share advisory subscription service were AFI, ARG, BRK.B and traditional index ETFs. Nothing wrong with that but there’s was no ongoing money to be made in telling others to simply do that. Let’s see if he reverts back to sensible investing.

 

Grandpa needs idiot proofing and should invest 100k with Lakehouse so he can get 30%p/a compounding away.

 

The only asset that makes sense for a “forever” portfolio is equities as equities have internal management.

The only question a “forever” portfolio must address is “renewal”

Very few stocks last for multigenerational periods – none forever. So, the portfolio question becomes how you refresh the holdings. The answer, simple systematic tracking of market capitalisation!

Save yourself the subscription fee. The only interest is whether he gets it right and recommends broad-based low-cost capitalisation tracking funds. If he gets it right, you already know the answer. If he gets it wrong, you have saved yourself paying for poor guidance. Win-Win.

 

Great post, thanks

 

quote..
Very few stocks last for multigenerational periods – none forever. So, the portfolio question becomes how you refresh the holdings. The answer, simple systematic tracking of market capitalisation!

Dunno--That's a very simple way to look at everything ..But just have to ask the question as i'm not the sharpest knife in the draw could you please --explain what systematic tracking of market capitalisation means to you..

The only systematic tracking I use is just check the numbers once or twice a week..

 

Index funds. Specifically, cap weighted.

 

I think I might quote these words of wisdom @dunno and leave with our will for our offspring. Not sure what they will make of your handle "Dunno" (I will give you credit) but I'm sure that is some of the best free advice they will never pay for! Thanks

 

I went to the link and its mind boggling the amount of marketing he is throwing at this.

Here is a caption regarding the portfolio:

I won’t just give little pie charts or figures, either. You’ll see me and my Chief Investment Analyst, Mike, hunt down this portfolio. There are 250+ funds to invest in … we’ll be searching through them, and then investing my own $100,000 in the best ones.
And when we’re done, it will be a complete portfolio …

And I’ll NEVER touch it again!

It’s just going to keep pumping dividends into my bank account twice a year … for the next 100+ years.

So looks like no direct shares.

Bit sad he is charging $397, doesn't sound much, but for a lot of people its another expense that they can ill afford. For that cost he is including a lot of other stuff, but I would have thought his book for $20 odd dollars would cover most of what people require hence the $397 seems a bit much from a value for money perspective.

 

12 month refund period if your not happy with service provided

 

Choosing from 250 funds is very..... few. This suggests its already a limited population, such as just index funds. Which are pretty vanilla. Cant see how this adds value compared to just choosing the most liquid and lowest cost listed index fund and buying it yourself?

Suppose if you dont know anything about it and dont want to learn might be useful.

 

I am totally confused (normal.) The implication is the $100k is static and no further capital will be added to it. So assuming a yield of 4% that's $4k pa. While I acknowledge there may be some incremental increase in income with company profitability I suspect no one is going to live the high life on that annual income welcome though it may be.

I'm not knocking the concept I simply don't understand how it equates to the grand statement or the type of structure to be established.

 

I am lacking the same understanding.