Re: pooled investments?

Is there such a thing as a pooled investment fund that doesn't actually

> lose money for the investor. The benefits of these funds for those involved > in the financial services industry are plain to see. No matter how poorly a > fund performs they continue to leech more money from the punter in the form > of initial charges and management fees. > When a fund does manage not to lose money it isn't long before > some pretext is given for raising charges. > And lets not forget the people who talk up some of these funds > in the finacial press, (no doubt for a consideration). The same people who > waffled on about the "Tiger Economies" in the early nineties. Unless you > want to support glorified spivs put your money in the bank and keep it > there. > > P.S. the same applies to most "safe" bond funds. Invest in most of > these and within months if not weeks you will have less than you started of > with. > It's all a cynical racket folks. > >

P.S. Above all ignore the glossy brochures from investment companies that talk about "exciting opportunities" or an "upturn" just around the corner, because as far as the investor is concerned that's where they remain "just around the corner".

Reply to
Frank
Loading thread data ...

What's your view about direct investment into shares? You're obviously keen to help the banks make money, but would you do your own fund management?

Rob Graham

Reply to
Rob Graham

Why would you suffer short term losses if you hold gilts?

If you hold to maturity you will get the par value back.

Regards, Zen

formatting link
- Personal finance problems solved

Reply to
Zen

wrote

Duh - if gilt prices fall?!!

Eg if long-term interest rates rise, then a gilt with a lower coupon may look poor value - so it's price will drop in the market to compensate.

Reply to
Tim

wrote

Exactly! Perhaps you missed the "key point" in Jonathan's sentence :- "short term" (you may get losses if sell in "short term"). If you hold for the "long-term" instead (ie to maturity), then you'll get a return fixed at the outset.

We are all agreed!

Reply to
Tim

True

But the interest you receive should make up for it. Of course a lot of people don't realise that the interest can represent part return of capital.

Reply to
Jonathan Bryce

"Jonathan Bryce" wrote

Are the Inland Revenue one of those "people" that realise this or not?

Eg would they agree you don't need to pay income tax on interest received just before redemption, when you know that the redemption will be at a loss (hence class the interest as capital return, still "at a loss" hence no tax to be paid) ?

Reply to
Tim

In message , Jonathan Bryce writes

Thats true, if you measure by 'total return'. But many people dont realise that a redemption yield lower than running yield = capital loss.

Reply to
john boyle

If you want to hold on to the money for as long as possible, you will go for a low coupon bond (eg if it is a long term project where all the money comes in at the end)

Reply to
Jonathan Bryce

"Jonathan Bryce" wrote

Ack - sorry - I'm gonna have to learn to explain myself a bit better!!

I mean, *given that* you receive A on date d1/m1/yyy1, B on date d2/m2/yyy2, C on date d3/m3/yyy3 etc etc - what does it matter what part of each payment is "interest" or "capital"? Except for calculating tax, of course, as indicated earlier.

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.