Money Market Risk

[eridanus]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RockOn Good call, the SP500 futures are up 11 points on the news.

Too bad it didn't hold. SPX finished down almost 1%. I'm cashing in my change this week and sending it to the 401k.

[cute fuzzy bunny]

For about 2 days last month I was a little concerned about some of Primes positions and whether they'd cut the dividend payout to cover any short to intermediate issues.

I'm not at all worried about them breaking the buck. But your xx% yield might drop a little bit if they have to eat some of the paper they're holding.

[RockOn]

Funny but I keep getting emails that either don't show up or are modified on this thread.

Mostly they have to do with annuities. I would like to show that taking a lump sum of money and buying an SPIA annuity from Vanguard (with the 6% IRR return I have talked about, assuming living to age 86) has the same investment result as taking exactly that same lump sum and buying a mutual fund with a 6% annualized return and also living to age 86. For some reason some just don't seem to want that to be true. I do not know why. Someone please enlighten me. I cannot figure it out. If I am wrong, please show me why with some real numbers.

[cute fuzzy bunny]

YouTube - grumpy old troll

[Notmuchlonger]

YouTube - Monty Python-Bring out your dead!

[RockOn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cute fuzzy bunny YouTube - grumpy old troll

See this is what I get. Never even fact number one.

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Same feeling here.

Can we get back on topic?

[RockOn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cute fuzzy bunny Same feeling here. Can we get back on topic?

Are you afraid to find out the truth?

I'm willing to lay out some calculations, you just want to lay out insults.

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Well lets see, I've explained to you three times (at least) why your well laid calculations are irrelevant.

Why would explaining it again produce a different result?

In the meanwhile, this is a thread regarding money market risk. While you were marginally baited about your one-note-wonder-tapping about annuities, since then you've elected to continue to invite off topic discussion under some guise of problems with 'email' whatever that has to do with anything. Very repetitively and without much interest shown.

Nobody is responding to you because a lot of people put you on ignore yesterday when your head spontaneously exploded.

If you'd like to have a discussion about your annuity concerns, please start a thread regarding them and enjoy yourself. I mean, its all about getting attention, right?

Seems to me its just more desire for "open and honest posting" about something you feel very strongly about.

[RockOn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cute fuzzy bunny Well lets see, I've explained to you three times (at least) why your well laid calculations are irrelevant. Why would explaining it again produce a different result? In the meanwhile, this is a thread regarding money market risk. While you were marginally baited about your one-note-wonder-tapping about annuities, since then you've elected to continue to invite off topic discussion under some guise of problems with 'email' whatever that has to do with anything. Very repetitively and without much interest shown. Nobody is responding to you because a lot of people put you on ignore yesterday when your head spontaneously exploded. If you'd like to have a discussion about your annuity concerns, please start a thread regarding them and enjoy yourself. I mean, its all about getting attention, right? Seems to me its just more desire for "open and honest posting" about something you feel very strongly about.

Just facts.

Your explainations are lacking. You are not proving anything by saying it is irrelevant. It is relevant if I am using actual cash flow results. Saying I am doing it wrong or using the wrong methods doesn't change the fact that I can show you that annuities have the same investment outcome as any other 6% annualized investment. (With my age 86 assumption and Vanguards payouts). Why don't you take me on there with some facts instead of going on about why the IRR is an incorrect way to measure investments?

I understand the Thread is hijacked, but I didn't start it. I got insulted unfairly and didn't just let it go.

My email is actually jacked up or being edited, I do not know why.
I get emails with comments that are not showing up on the thread.

If I've been put on ignore I wish that didn't happened. When Nords refused to stop you from insulting me, I thought it was appropriate to push back. Awhile back Nords admitted I was correct on the 6% calculation, now he allows you to once again bash me about it. Hard for me to understand. In any case, I shouldn't have gone all out in my response.

I don't care about attention, I see this as entertainment with a chance to learn something. I do care if annuities are are good investment for me or others on the Forum. I don't see why that bothers you so much.

Lastly, what internal rate of return do you think annuity companies base their payouts on? The way you argue it, you must think it is 1% or something like that. I think 5.25% for the motality table age or 6% if your lucky enough to live 7 years longer feels about right. When it calculates to 6% for age 86, that looks like confirmation to me.

[ERD50]

RockOn - start a new thread - this one is about MM, not annuities. -ERD50

[RockOn]

Ok, good point, I'm sorry

Move on

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RockOn Saying I am doing it wrong or using the wrong methods doesn't change the fact that I can show you that annuities have the same investment outcome as any other 6% annualized investment.

I would think that demonstrating that you're using the wrong methodology to produce a comparison, and giving you a handful of links to well respected financial documents confirming that assertion would somewhat change the 'facts'.

Internal rate of return is a poor measure of an investment. Most non-lazy financial people use NPV to compare similar proposed capital investment projects.

IRR has no facility to handle reinvestments in a 'project'.

It is not applicable to apply a rate of return produced by an IRR calculation to unrelated and dissimilar investments.

Annuity sales people like to use IRR because it produces juicy numbers that sound better than they are.

The actual return for most people from an annuity will be around or about and usually less than 4%. Worse when you factor in the loss of principal.

You may not do an IRR unless you have an exact duration. Guessing at an 'end' of 86 is speculation, and in defiance of the well accepted mortality tables that say you'll be dead in the 81-82 range.

My issue with this is that at best you are poorly informed and dont listen very well. At worst, you're just banging on this drum to amuse youself.

Either way, I dont find the pollution appreciable. Far too much noise and not enough signal.

Quote:

When Nords refused to stop you from insulting me

Perhaps you could explain why Nords would have anything to do with what I do or dont say although I do respect his opinion. And for the record I never insulted you. I made a general comment about idiots and you decided that it applied to you and you went off like a roman candle.

Do continue with your "entertainment" in your own thread. Let me know how that works out for you.

[RockOn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cute fuzzy bunny I would think that demonstrating that you're using the wrong methodology to produce a comparison, and giving you a handful of links to well respected financial documents confirming that assertion would somewhat change the 'facts'. Internal rate of return is a poor measure of an investment. Most non-lazy financial people use NPV to compare similar proposed capital investment projects. IRR has no facility to handle reinvestments in a 'project'. It is not applicable to apply a rate of return produced by an IRR calculation to unrelated and dissimilar investments. Annuity sales people like to use IRR because it produces juicy numbers that sound better than they are. The actual return for most people from an annuity will be around or about and usually less than 4%. Worse when you factor in the loss of principal. You may not do an IRR unless you have an exact duration. Guessing at an 'end' of 86 is speculation, and in defiance of the well accepted mortality tables that say you'll be dead in the 81-82 range. My issue with this is that at best you are poorly informed and dont listen very well. At worst, you're just banging on this drum to amuse youself. Either way, I dont find the pollution appreciable. Far too much noise and not enough signal. Perhaps you could explain why Nords would have anything to do with what I do or dont say although I do respect his opinion. And for the record I never insulted you. I made a general comment about idiots and you decided that it applied to you and you went off like a roman candle. Do continue with your "entertainment" in your own thread. Let me know how that works out for you.

I won't continue here, please move these comments to the other thread and I'll respond to your points

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Yeah, well you head on over there chief and I'll be there directly to debate you further.

[RockOn]

Meaning? I'd like to sign off if you don't want to work through this tonight. If you want to go on I'll give you a fair chance to show me where I'm wrong if you'll allow me to do the same.

[Marquette]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cute fuzzy bunny Nobody is responding to you because a lot of people put you on ignore yesterday when your head spontaneously exploded.

Or months ago. Man, I hate being trendy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RockOn Awhile back Nords admitted I was correct on the 6% calculation, now he allows you to once again bash me about it. Hard for me to understand. In any case, I shouldn't have gone all out in my response.

You're probably not aware, but Nords is neither a moderator nor is he CFB's grouchy older brother (nor yours for that matter). As such, Nords no more allows CFB to do or not do something than he allows the wind to blow.

One should compare IRR and NPV of an annuity against, for example, the Vanguard Payout Distribution Focus fund (VPDFX... 7.5% payout based on current share price).

I'm not interested in annuities simply based on carrier longevity... and that's not including the staff all dying off from legionnaires disease: Fears for workers at office as pair get legionnaires' disease - Latest News, Health - Independent.ie

[RockOn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marquette Or months ago. Man, I hate being trendy. You're probably not aware, but Nords is neither a moderator nor is he CFB's grouchy older brother (nor yours for that matter). As such, Nords no more allows CFB to do or not do something than he allows the wind to blow. One should compare IRR and NPV of an annuity against, for example, the Vanguard Payout Distribution Focus fund (VPDFX... 7.5% payout based on current share price). I'm not interested in annuities simply based on carrier longevity... and that's not including the staff all dying off from legionnaires disease: Fears for workers at office as pair get legionnaires' disease - Latest News, Health - Independent.ie

On the ignore list, open-minded are we not?

Nords got on me, acting like he was a mod, for breaking a minor rule awhile ago, I thought he was a mod. He seemed to hold himself up as such, sorry for not knowing that. He is listed as "Moderator Emeritus".

I don't agree on what you can compare an annuity to, it can be compared to "any" investment, not just your selected fund. I don't know where you get that idea from. We could have a discussion about that if I wasn't being ignored.

On your last point, that is a good one.

[Marquette]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RockOn On the ignore list, open-minded are we not?

Obviously, since I'm typing here, one can still view posts of those on their ignore list. However, it does cut down on the chaff while reading.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RockOn Nords got on me, acting like he was a mod, for breaking a minor rule awhile ago, I thought he was a mod. He seemed to hold himself up as such, sorry for not knowing that. He is listed as "Moderator Emeritus".

And surely you know what emeritus means?

Quote:

Originally Posted by RockOn I don't agree on what you can compare an annuity to, it can be compared to "any" investment, not just your selected fund. I don't know where you get that idea from. We could have a discussion about that if I wasn't being ignored.

Well, feel free to compare away. What's the NPV and IRR of whatever annuity mix you choose with whichever riders you like? How does it compare to whichever other funds you'd like to compare it to? Feel free to start a new thread on the subject, I believe it's been suggested to pursue that a few times. Or, dig up one of the other annuity thread and start the discussion there.

I'm only suggesting that including a fund such as the managed payout funds would be a fair comparison. As opposed, for instance, to hatian penny stocks.

My only contribution is that I know what the inside of an annuity company looks like and I wouldn't trust one with my money over what I reasonably expect my investment horizon to be... and I'd get a better deal on an annuity than just about anyone here. You can discount that as familiarity bias, though.

[ERD50]

Does this mean there is *no* money market risk?

-ERD50