Big Financial News coming out tomorrow

[Jimbo]

hi kurt,

please show me the average property price in 1930,1940,1950,1960,1970,1980,1990,2000 - compare it against inflation and tell me that it is a bad investment

Your smug attitude is funny, particularly given that you are wrong.

jimbo, do you class 5yrs as med-long term?

I'd call it short-medium actually

In any case, it's irrelevant because it doesn't happen

 

[Moffo]

I'd call it short-medium actually

In any case, it's irrelevant because it doesn't happen

what doesn't happen?

 

[Moffo]

That's not the definition of risk.

Risk has two components, systematic risk and unsystematic risk, risk is not defined by compounded return...

yet I'm wrong ????

kurt, lets not play textbook answers like jimbo

risk as in the return on investment. to put it in simple language for the interests of this discussion, whenever someone tips in $1m for an investment property, they are primarily concerned with what it will be worth in the future, that being, the price.

Risk is that the prices will go down. So, Kurt, return and risk are highly correlated. Higher the risk, higher the return. so with that in mind, tell me how the return is not a measure of the risk?

 

[Kurt Angle]

kurt, lets not play textbook answers like jimbo

risk as in the return on investment.

Risk is not equal to ROI at all, risk guides expected ROI.. nothing more.

to put it in simple language for the interests of this discussion, whenever someone tips in $1m for an investment property, they are primarily concerned with what it will be worth in the future, that being, the price.

That's not what we are debating.

We're debating why if someone with $1 million dollars buys a single $1 million asset.

This is a complete lack of diversification, that is why it is risky.

Risk is that the prices will go down.

:lol:

That's not risk at all... f*ck me, learn about finance before talking about it.

So, Kurt, return and risk are highly correlated. Higher the risk, higher the return. so with that in mind, tell me how the return is not a measure of the risk?

Risk is the variance away from expected ROI.

If you expect a +7% return, and you get +15%, that is just as risky as a -1% return.

To eliminate risk, you diversify with assets that can correspond with a negative correlation. Simple stuff.

 

[Macca]

So where's the BIG finacial news?

 

[millersnose]

shhh

its sekwet big financial news that only financial heavyweights like moffo know about

and it will be released today...no tommorro...no..wednesday...no thursday...no.......

 

[Jimbo]

what doesn't happen?

Investment of superannuation funds into residential property

Fund managers won't touch them, and the ATO won't let SMSFs (self managed superannuation funds) buy them unless the fund is enormous

You are wrong. Just accept it

 

[Jimbo]

:lol:

That's not risk at all... f*ck me, learn about finance before talking about it.

:lol:

Moffo is like every other young wanker who thinks he's Gordon Gekko because he works in finance

But he'll always just be Bud Fox...

 

[Moffo]

Risk is not equal to ROI at all, risk guides expected ROI.. nothing more.



That's not what we are debating.

We're debating why if someone with $1 million dollars buys a single $1 million asset.

This is a complete lack of diversification, that is why it is risky.



:lol:

That's not risk at all... f*ck me, learn about finance before talking about it.



Risk is the variance away from expected ROI.

If you expect a +7% return, and you get +15%, that is just as risky as a -1% return.

To eliminate risk, you diversify with assets that can correspond with a negative correlation. Simple stuff.

hi kurt

you either can't read or you're a f**kstick

not sure which one it is

 

[Moffo]

:lol:

Moffo is like every other young wanker who thinks he's Gordon Gekko because he works in finance

But he'll always just be Bud Fox...

:lol:

dimbo you make me laugh

 

[millersnose]

hi kurt

you either can't read or you're a f**kstick

remember kids

moffo takes exception to offensive posts

 

[Kurt Angle]

hi kurt

you either can't read or you're a f**kstick

not sure which one it is

How?

By refuting what you say with an accurate representation of the facts ?

If you knew that the definition of "risk" was, we wouldn't be discussing it.

You seem to think a higher ROI automatically = higher risk, so a nice easy question for you.

Returns over last 5 years:

Investment A -

Returns: 15%, 20%, 25%, 10%, 30%.
Average return: 20%

Investment B -

Returns: 40%, 40%, 40%, 40%, 40%
Average return: 40%.

----

So which has been the riskier investment over the last 5 years, A or B?

 

[Moffo]

remember kids

moffo takes exception to offensive posts

wheres my anti-jewish posts millers?

no cake for you until you find that post!

 

[El Diablo]

Moff, I thought you were against ridiculing people on public forums?

 

[Moffo]

How?

By refuting what you say with an accurate representation of the facts ?

If you knew that the definition of "risk" was, we wouldn't be discussing it.

You seem to think a higher ROI automatically = higher risk, so a nice easy question for you.

Returns over last 5 years:

Investment A -

Returns: 15%, 20%, 25%, 10%, 30%.
Average return: 20%

Investment B -

Returns: 40%, 40%, 40%, 40%, 40%
Average return: 40%.

----

So which has been the riskier investment over the last 5 years, A or B?

please don't patronise me kurt, i've done more than enough risk to know what im talking about - thanks for the question but excuse me if i pass on it

when did i say it a higher ROI AUTOMATICALLY means higher risk? i said that there is a strong correlation between the two. again, please don't distort what i say, it makes for a frustrating discussion

 

[millersnose]

trying to hijack another thread moffo

you are a liar...thats common record here

you may deny posting lists of jews and making racist posts but everyone has seen them


but i digress

this thread is about your self proclaimed insights into the world of high finance

and your amusing attempts to save some pride by calling people names

 

[Moffo]

Moff, I thought you were against ridiculing people on public forums?

go back and read what i said el

there is a difference between calling someone a f**kstick and calling someone racist

 

[Moffo]

trying to hijack another thread moffo

you are a liar...thats common record here

you may deny posting lists of jews and making racist posts but everyone has seen them


but i digress

this thread is about your self proclaimed insights into the world of high finance

and your amusing attempts to save some pride by calling people names

do you want that chocolate cake or not? You still can't show me a post i've made ridiculing jews. Answer my question or retract your comment...simple as that

I've given you 6 hours now and you can't do it. Again, put up or shut up

 

[El Diablo]

go back and read what i said el

so it only applies to owners?

there is a difference between calling someone a f**kstick and calling someone racist

it's still ridiculing them

 

[Moffo]

so it only applies to owners?

absolutely not El, as i've already said before. same rules should apply to everyone

it's still ridiculing them

correct. but there are clear differences between the two or you disagree with that?