|
|
04-02-2008, 10:37 AM
|
#41
|
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,895
|
yup, you got it. and that was just the fee at my price point, on the lower range of what was for sale there. it ran a lot higher for others. they tried convincing me that they were spending $1mm on advertising but i hardly saw any of that in local media. they insisted the advertising was international; but, um, isn't that why i'm with a pricey international realtor in the first place?
even if they did spend $1mm on advertising and adding the rental on that tent, i would not be surprised to learn that the auctioneer walked away netting about $1/2mm or more for his two-hour day.
__________________
"off with their heads"~~dr. joseph-ignace guillotin
"life should begin with age and its privileges and accumulations, and end with youth and its capacity to splendidly enjoy such advantages."~~mark twain - letter to edward kimmitt 1901
|
|
|
|
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!
Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!
|
04-02-2008, 10:44 AM
|
#42
|
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,629
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by lazygood4nothinbum
thanx for the post. was curious to what happened there as that is the very auction i opted out of. at first when they tried to get me to participate they said there would be a 10% commission which i thought high but what the heck. turns out the 10% is payed by the buyer (as if) so of course i would have had to factor that into the price. plus the auctioneer wanted $15k from me up front just to participate.
when i refused to pay their cost of doing business (what's up with that?), they said they'd work with me. someone would call me back. i told them to tell the person who was to call me back that i'd only consider the auction on condition that they only get their fee upon closing and not before. needless to say, i never got a return call. what a scam.
|
Fascinating story. Thanks for the post.
|
|
|
04-02-2008, 11:18 AM
|
#43
|
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,895
|
__________________
"off with their heads"~~dr. joseph-ignace guillotin
"life should begin with age and its privileges and accumulations, and end with youth and its capacity to splendidly enjoy such advantages."~~mark twain - letter to edward kimmitt 1901
|
|
|
04-02-2008, 05:50 PM
|
#44
|
Full time employment: Posting here.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 798
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Independent
Rockon -
This is one way to think of bonds:
Suppose I think I have a way of generating a good return on capital in my business. I've got my own money in the business, but I want some additional capital. I could do that by selling shares or by borrowing.
People who might supply the captital understand the tradeoffs. With equity, they participate in all the upside, but they take downside risk. If they lend, their upside is fixed, but they greatly reduce the risk.
If I want to keep the upside for myself (borrow instead of selling shares), then I have to make an offer to the lenders that they percieve as a good deal vs. stock (because they could always buy stock in some other business). Since stock is likely to generate real returns, they will insist on bonds that are "as good, considering the different guarantees" as stock.
i.e. The actual yields on bonds will be whatever it takes to get a mix of equity and debt financing which appears "most attractive" to the stockholders (since they are owners), given the fact that the potential bond buyers could also buy stock somewhere.
I don't see any mechanism that would make the yields equal to the CPI (or whatever you mean by "inflation").
Historically, we see that bonds in the US really have had yields in excess of the CPI, so my theory isn't contradicted by experience.
I could also talk about "bonds" that finance consumer spending instead of business capital, but that would make for a long post.
|
I think the point you are getting at is that bonds should have a real return. I agree, just not a very high one. After all, if bonds have much lower risk as you said, they should also have a lower expected real return, correct?
Stocks historically, I don't like using that word since history is longer than the 100 years we usually tend to assume captures everything, have had a real return of 7%.
On bonds the real return is less. It has been around 3% historically, I think. Right now a top quality bond corporate pays about 5.5% or likely a 0.5% to 3.5% real return depending on what inflation does. Greenspan said to expect 5% going forward for inflation.
I will agree that I would expect some real return, I think 3% is a high expectation if buying into the bond market today, which is at very low yields due to a 28 year bond bubble. Look at TIPS, some have a negative real yield if bought today.
|
|
|
04-02-2008, 08:52 PM
|
#45
|
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 7,113
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RockOn
I think the point you are getting at is that bonds should have a real return. I agree, just not a very high one. After all, if bonds have much lower risk as you said, they should also have a lower expected real return, correct?
...
On bonds the real return is less. It has been around 3% historically, I think. Right now a top quality bond corporate pays about 5.5% or likely a 0.5% to 3.5% real return depending on what inflation does. Greenspan said to expect 5% going forward for inflation.
I will agree that I would expect some real return, I think 3% is a high expectation if buying into the bond market today, which is at very low yields due to a 28 year bond bubble. ...
|
IMHO bonds have very real risks, default is a big one.
__________________
Duck bjorn.
|
|
|
04-03-2008, 08:06 AM
|
#46
|
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,629
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RockOn
I think the point you are getting at is that bonds should have a real return. I agree, just not a very high one. After all, if bonds have much lower risk as you said, they should also have a lower expected real return, correct?
Stocks historically, I don't like using that word since history is longer than the 100 years we usually tend to assume captures everything, have had a real return of 7%.
On bonds the real return is less. It has been around 3% historically, I think. Right now a top quality bond corporate pays about 5.5% or likely a 0.5% to 3.5% real return depending on what inflation does. Greenspan said to expect 5% going forward for inflation.
I will agree that I would expect some real return, I think 3% is a high expectation if buying into the bond market today, which is at very low yields due to a 28 year bond bubble. Look at TIPS, some have a negative real yield if bought today.
|
I apparantly mis-read your earlier post.
Yes, I intended to say that the "most likely" yield on bonds should be lower than stocks, but that doesn't mean it should be equal to inflation, or even inflation plus the most likely default losses.
Note that I was talking about corporate bonds, though gov't bonds need yields that are reasonably related to corporates.
|
|
|
04-03-2008, 11:56 AM
|
#47
|
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 7,113
|
Let me add that in addition to default, there are liquidity issues and transaction costs should you need to redeem prior to maturity.
IMHO Unless you are confident that you will hold until maturity a bond mutual fund is probably a better choice for most investors.
__________________
Duck bjorn.
|
|
|
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
» Recent Threads
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
» Quick Links
|
|
|