Depends on different people risk appetite la..
Last time i 50% warrant, even more geng.. End up can see thru my flesh when economy down.

So bond is good

corporate tax not 26%-ah? sorry if i mistake.

good to know this, and according to prospectus, PM might only buy back all the unit if less than 1000,
seem they busy doing something else.

thanks kparam & kevyeoh

Well, i dont QUOTE google - google the word "QUOTE" for the meaining

Hm, i dont "believe" cookie cutters leh, especially when i've got my own cohesive entries & exit rules which is running on Asset Allocation
ie. allocate ammo to each asset type but only buy-in / sell-off based on my entries & exit plans.

The assets held currently are at such ratio i posted earlier BUT the ammo is allocated 1/3 on each - Fixed Income, Equities exREITs & REITs/Properties, ie. the held includes idle cash & bonds sitting around which are actually ammo i've allocated to Equities & REITs/Properties but havent bought / switched in much for the year due to my entry & exit rules

What to do - not of value to my value entry rules
and
way too high to put much in via TwinVest rules.

Of course you're entitled to follow your own Asset Allocations & Entry/Exit rules + think that minimum i should buta hold 60% equity. My rules tells me differently for now - ammo's been allocated, triggers aint being hit to plonk in the heavy artillery

This post has been edited by wongmunkeong: Aug 13 2011, 10:03 PM

natural resources always depliting, some is renewable resources and some is not.
In future, may be no need oils ald, there is few way to get natural resources in future

Heheh - but i'm old enough to see 1997-1998 DECIMATE hold blindly 60% to 80% equities, which supposedly youngsters should and never recovered if they kept holding only. Take a look at historical data on how long it took KLCI to climb back up to pre-1997 highest point from post 1998 200-ish index. If U look and stare at it from 1998 till 2006/2007, U may be totally give up on stocks/equities Then 2008 happens!

This post has been edited by wongmunkeong: Aug 13 2011, 10:09 PM

25%

You quote Google, in the sense that "just google" because it's too long for you to write, or something like that. But no problem, I actually agree about "your rules", which is different from "my rules" which is different from "other people's rules".

DCA is fine, if you consider it as long-term investment. But then, you could be regularly sinking your hard-earned cash into a drain regularly.

But VCA, or twin-vest or whatever is just too vague for which people keep discussing but never provide anything useful because there is too much "it depends". So that makes it meaningless to tell people to "google".

---

Added on August 13, 2011, 10:14 pmI never said that is what you blindly should do. I said that is what is what you get when you "googled". There is a whole bunch of things you could get too, including DCA and VCA and TwinVest.


This post has been edited by howszat: Aug 13 2011, 10:14 PM

noted n tq.

In fact, Some cannot even break even the portfolio in the 2008 crisis till now although doing DCA..
Equities UT drop 50% or more.. Terrible.. Those holding that time now still speechless.

Of course, high-risk, high-returns.

There are many types of lotteries with the highest risks, and highest returns. They are known as gambling.

Yup yup - thus DCA, VCA or whatever - again, must be cohesive with filtering and selecting a fund/stock/etc to use the methodologies on.

Er.. meaningless to tell people to "google" it? My dear - do U read books and do bulat bulat OR U read / get info, process and then make it your own as it use what is useful for your own situation/approach/risk appetite?

If people dont search (ie. "google it"), dont read/learn, dont process and make it their own by customizing it to their own requirements, how to grow ar? In addition, can U teach the DETAILS of some really funky formula / approach that took 2 different books to explain in forums?

Well?
If U can, perhaps you're a communication genius

OR your meaning of "But VCA, or twin-vest or whatever is just too vague for which people keep discussing but never provide anything useful because there is too much "it depends". So that makes it meaningless to tell people to "google"." is something else?

And yes, i AM too lazy to re-type everything found in them books AND what's already available on the Net, searchable via google. I think sharing concepts where forumers think are their cuppa tea and then they themselves dive into the details are better. Then again, i may be a philistine

This post has been edited by wongmunkeong: Aug 13 2011, 10:26 PM

Of course, you should google to get the meaning of the terms to get a basic understanding of at least what other people are saying about it.

DCA is something that has been abused by agents without providing all the necessary details and implications. VCA is too vague.

My point is you quote these acronyms too often, to the point of being misleading because you quote it often, and no one challenged you.

My dear Howazat, I'm not a sales agent nor do I have anything to gain by being misleading. I'm merely pointing out what works for me and statistically what beats DCA and lump sum in terms of $ at risk Vs returns.

I've also shared statistics and even some of my own transactions to share how it can or can't work. Thus, since U seem to say I'm misleading fellow former, please state how and where. Momma says if U can't identify the problem, how can it be solved. I read another - if U can't identify the problem, it may be with U .

BTW, how many fellow former have U actually met or emailed in detailed one to one communications to share things clearer which can't be done on a forum? Follow the $ self appointed Guardian and challenger. I'm not here for $ or glory.

One-on-one is irrelevant. What I have to say I say in public. No problems with you sharing your points of view and whatever works for you. I'm just pointing out there are more to that view.

My opinion is that all your statistics are of very limited value. Because there are too many factors outside an investor's control. For eg, a good Fund Manager may be replaced by a not-so-good Manager, or the basic objectives of the fund are no longer appropriate for the economic conditions. Which means that all those statistical methods are just basic fiddling while your fund loses money (or as Rome burns as the saying goes).

It's for mutual fund, it's need to service charge at 5.5% during purchase and 5.5% during sold ?

Purchase! No charge during sell.

oh~ then reduce my panic ... scared me, total 11% charge
I want to ask, how a fund calculate the non taxable income ? bcoz even the the unit price drop but it still hv income to buy the unit. end up it may reduce lose on it ... so far i calculated .. all the fund losing money. How come they said grantee didnt burn the basic money invested ?

---

Added on August 14, 2011, 12:35 ambase on the purchase transaction, why said the fund min need RM1k to purchase ? purchase 1k fund, then should add 1k + charge to make 1k fund purchase, so total is ~ RM947 used to buy the fund ...

This post has been edited by Dackson: Aug 14 2011, 12:35 AM

Ah, U may be right. Well, what do U suggest? Let em ride, don't do anything, etc?

Hm, for a person arguing against something, U don't seem to be bringing any other options to the table. BTW, did I ever state that my approach is the only viable method or view? Since U stated that there are too many variables outside an investor's control, what would U suggest then, as a better method or approach to managing risks?

In addition, have U done research papers into statistical probabilities and risk management of value averaging vs dollar cost averaging vs lump sum approaches to investing? If not, please do yourself a favour - get off yr high horse and dig for the published papers on these. BTW, since the statistics I posted are from the PM's software with sharpe ratio, std deviations, CAGR, etc which U stated as limited use, then perhaps U can share something more useful?

Come on, be a man & come clean - what's bothering U ar?

This post has been edited by wongmunkeong: Aug 14 2011, 06:41 AM

buy unit = SC up to 5.5%.
sell units = no SC for PM.

---

Added on August 14, 2011, 1:25 amINVEST UNIT TRSUT IS WITH UR OWN RISK. NOT GUARANTEE AT ANY OF TIME. UNIT TRSUT WILL WORK FOR U OVER THE TIME AND IT CAN GIVE BETTER RETURNS THAN FD AND OF COURCE WITH UR BASIC MONEY INVESTED.


waht is the unit price = A
A x 5.5% = SC for per units = B
B x (C = how many units u have) = Rm1000 - RM947 = RM53

RM53 will be deduct from ur min investment amout rm1k as SC.

THE SC WILL DEDUCT FROM THE AMOUNT U INVEST. R U WILLING TO PAY THE SC SEPARATLY?


this link can help u http://www.pk31-publicmutual.blogspot.com

This post has been edited by kparam77: Aug 14 2011, 01:25 AM