|
When my mother died a few months ago, her portfolio included many individual stocks that she had bought half a century ago. What she originally paid for these stocks back in the 1950's and 1960's was only a tiny fraction of their worth in recent years. She could not sell them and buy other stocks that were performing better, due to the capital gains taxes that she would have had to pay. So, she was essentially "locked in" to these stocks while she was still alive.
Now that is bad enough, but what if these had been mutual funds instead of individual stocks? She not only would have got "locked into" the investment, but with a mutual fund you also get the fund manager and fees, and you would be locked into those and whatever changes may occur in these aspects, too.
Is this a non-issue? It's kind of hair-raising, thinking that in my old age I might be "locked in" to a fund manager that hasn't even been born yet, not to mention whatever fees he might dream up.
(Sorry if this question is too naive for some of you but at least I asked.)
__________________
"Already we are boldly launched upon the deep; but soon we shall be lost in its unshored, harborless immensities." - - H. Melville, 1851
|
Threaded Mode
