If it looks too good to be true.....

I have received an invitation to invest in a truffle farm on the basis of a predicted return of 40% (pa).
This is not a Spam mail, it's come from a genuine source that I subscribe to, however it still looks too good do be true.
I'm suspicious that this is another "ostrich farm" investment (which were also recommended to people via genuine sources), but I don't know enough to be sure.
Does anybody know anything about this market to tell whether this is likely to be an achievable return or not.
FWIW this is the second "questionable" investment opportunity that this source has sent me in the past 3 months, so I'm wondering if perhaps their DD is not up to scratch.
tim
Reply to
tim....
wrote:
If you knew something could give you 40% return why would you share it?
TGTBT
Reply to
mogga

That is the concern.
But this is not a simple linear investment in which the operators can invest whatever they have available. It's a lumpy investment where there is a minimum abount that needs to be invested, which presumably they don't have.
So the question really is:
Why are the offering the 40% to me (all and sundry) when they could borrow from the bank at lower rates instead? What does the bank know that I don't?
- To which the answer could simply be, the bank doesn't have any money :-)
tim
Reply to
tim....
What do they know that the Duke of Edinburgh hasn't been told about? Or is the 40% based on you getting nothing for 10+ years and then a fortune?
formatting link
Reply to
Robin

The 40% return is 'predicted'. Presumably there is also the possibility of a 100% loss (and perhaps more than 100% if further 'investment' is needed). So it sounds risky.
Reply to
BartC

Having searched a bit more, it is this:
formatting link
This does seem to be an awful lot more speculative than the mail I received, which implied that the company had been returning the "predicted" investment returns for the past three years.
Time I ditched this mailing list :-)
Not that the above article is without exaggeration, "successful BBC Dragons Den entrepreneur Dr Paul Thomas PhD" implies that he was successful on DD, whereas "successful " actually only applies to some other unspecified activity, as he failed on DD.
Would you invest in someone who resorted to such weasel grammatical tricks in his press release! (No, don't answer)
tim
Reply to
tim....

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.