Killer investment advice on TV

I'm sooo confused!

I read newsgroups like this one and the consensus is I can't do better than an index fund for long term growth.

But I'm also an insomniac, which means I watch a lot of Really Good TV. Every week I see some dude (who is clearly my new best friend) tell me if I just send $29.95 for his package, he will show me how to double my money annually. I just need the right investment tools. It is in various domains: FOREX trading, stock market tools, real estate

- but it's all the same idea.

So - are all of these offers just trying to scam me out of $29.95? Or is it in fact possible to beat the index?

My first thought is if I knew how to double my money annually, I'd be

*doing* it, not trying to sell you the secret. Hmmm.

But I'd love to see some knowledgeable comentary!

Reply to
stone583
Loading thread data ...

Both. It may indeed be possible to beat an index, but these ads are scams. You said it yourself below:

-Will

Reply to
Will Trice

Both. They are trying to scam you out of $29.95. But it is also possible to beat the index. But barring a run of luck, it takes a lot of study, an expensive education (bought by making and learning from mistakes), and finding a market nitch (some kind of trading/investing where you have an advantage over other traders/investors).

Yep.

-- Doug

Reply to
Douglas Johnson

It's not that you can't, it's just very unlikely. There is far more evidence to agree with this statement than disagree. If the long term return of the market is 10%, I've seen many studies that show the typical investor manages to see 3-4%, not due to fees, but bad timing. Getting in at tops, out at bottoms, etc. If I can get 9.9% over that period I pat myself on the back.

The market is not 100% efficient. It's possible to study a number of stocks to discover those which are undervalued, but this takes time, patience, and a lot of discipline. Cramer is quoted as saying that you must be willing to devote 1 hour per week to follow each stock you own. For most people, this implies you can't own more than 10-15 individual stocks. If one or two goes up 5 fold, it's a nice return, but only a small fraction of your portfolio. If one tanks, likewise.

If I knew how to double my money annually, I'd be selling the method for millions, not $30. Risk follows reward. Any return above the averages requires some level of risk. Even my comments above don't suggest that level of return. If your really good, a small premium to the market, not

100%.

JOE

Reply to
joetaxpayer

go read elaine at

formatting link
report back when you're read a months worth as to the markets, expect around mid-august a very substantial correction to occur

Reply to
Robert

I also read the worlds gonna end in early-August so I'm not too worried about it.

Reply to
kastnna

Stone,

Try googling "efficient market hypothesis". Under the hypothesis/ theory (there's still some debate, I believe) there are levels of efficiency. All levels except for the perfectly efficient level allow for minor inefficiencies in the market to be exploited (few argue that we are in the 'perfectly efficient model').

This suggests that you can "beat the market". But as everyone else here said, its very hard to do and worth a whole lot more than $29.95. Oh yeah, and once a method becomes common knowledge, it gets incorporated into the market movements and it no longer works as well (or at all). Doesn't that stink!

If you could systematically beat the market, it would be insane to tell everyone for $29.95.

Reply to
kastnna

Like the other replies, I think that you can beat an index fund that comprises all stocks.

Yes, its a scam. But, it is possible to beat the index.

Just read the Random Walk book or one on contrarian investing to get a better idea on how to increase your investment skills.

For instance, foreign stocks are doing better than domestic stocks, so buy some EWY. And, of course, energy stocks will continue to do better than average.

-- Ron

Reply to
Ron Peterson

I hope this is a tongue-in-cheek quip given your Jan 2 '07 post:

"On July 6, 2006, I made a claim in this news group that XLE would be up

10% more than the S&P at the end of the year.

The S&P is up 11.33% and XLE is up 2.01%, just the opposite of what I predicted. I am just lucky that I am diversified in my investments."

In the last 6 months, XLE has outperformed. Maybe you were just 6 months early on a good prediction. I guess timing is everything. JOE

Reply to
joetaxpayer

It takes a long time to establish a trend, and new technology can change everything.

Currently oil peaks in the late summer because of added travel, so an annual change is better judge of enery stocks.

-- Ron

Reply to
Ron Peterson

perhaps I was off with my comment by five days, nevertheless, I stand by my original warning

I *did* try to give you a warning about the markets

Reply to
Robert

You're still a little early, a "substantial correction" (as you predicted) has not yet occurred. Although it still could...

-Will

Reply to
Will Trice

I was just clownin around with ya.

I'm a buy and hold investor so I really don't care about short term corrections. IMO, I don't believe this is a "correction" anyway. Just as markets can get overly "pumped up" by investor sentiment, they can get unjustly supressed. I think the media is using fear to instill the later scenario.

Most of our volatility has been subprime mortgage and credit crunch worries. When looked at logically, the subprime loss will only be about 1% of the mortgage market. Furthermore, mortgage backed Securities only make up a small percentage of the total market. The "correction" shouldn't have even been noticed.

Hedge funds and traders have overinflated the seriousness of current events to scare everyone and create volatility. The aforementioned groups profit from volatility regardless of overall gain or loss.

Reply to
kastnna

you're only at the start of the drop.....

Reply to
Robert

BeanSmart website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.