Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Simba who wrote (96807)	7/21/2002 3:56:42 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

good to know you are still around of course with lesser money in your 401K. Also looks like you did not make the switch to NASDAQ from SP500 at the top as per your original plan. simba, bgr was just talking tough. he clarified his plan as the nasdaq tumbled. yes, he did so years ago. however, i think it is funny he didn't clarify on the way up! -lol- However it is difficult to believe your claim of 13% compound annual return based on DCA into SP500 starting in 1994. As per the following chart a constant weekly DCA investment into SP500 including generous dividend of 2% per year starting in Jan 1 1994 will yield only a cumulative nominal return < 15% much less than what DCA into a 6% constant yield investment would have been. home.att.net simba, i think he includes the 10% contribution from his employer, and all its return over the years as gains on only the money he put in. this, of course, boosts his return dramatically. I think either your puts were bailing your out or you are including contributions of your employer as return of the SP500 when it is not. Heck SP500 is now nearly even with 1997 and your were buying all the way from 1997-2002. yeah, it is pretty clear bgr is accounting like enron and the govt. ;-) You may want to rerun your spread sheet calculations and calculate the return on total DCA investment which included your employer's match and not return on only your contributions. If you still claim 13% clearly your were goosing up your return by other active strategies like market timing, shorts and not the passive DCA into SP500 which you were preaching to this thread. ooooh, simba, ya gotta hate it when the facts hit... and hit hard. i copied your chart and showed it to bgr. he said he didn't know what it meant. since you explained it, i won't. Just setting the facts straight BGR. Good to hear from you. ouch... it hurts to know a skinny t-bil took you out back and whooped your *ss.

To: Simba who wrote (96807)	7/21/2002 4:57:33 PM
From: BGR	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

Simba, My plan was to start moving money from S&P500 to NASDAQ over 4 years. Please do not misquote me. I am continuing that plan, about halfway done. I recalculated, and my calculations stand. My employer contributions went into puts, and hence is accounted for. The puts made little money in the boom years, and a good return in the last 2 years. Perhaps they made a difference, and I am happy if they have. Just as I wrote of their value year after year during 1993-1999, w/ a smile in my face (as collecting insurance benefits is not exactly a happy matter), I feel justified including their returns in the portfolio, during the crash years. That's the whole point of insurance, like home/auto/life. As for the chart, I do not know its origin, and I suspect that it is incorrect. Perhaps you should recheck your calculations. -BGR.