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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Canadian REITS, Trusts & Dividend Stocks -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ron Everest who wrote (3747)	7/25/2002 4:43:49 PM
From: David Alon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11633

Ron, I agree with that scenerio,but remember that at this point your yield is only 7%.One has to measure the risk/reward ratio. I am looking to do that with a higher yield, eg CSS.UN.

To: Ron Everest who wrote (3747)	7/25/2002 4:55:26 PM
From: Peter W. Panchyshyn	Respond to of 11633

I believe there is a further benefit increasing one's net yield in that only 32% of the 12% is taxable and all of the borrowing costs are deductible. ------- Your take on EIT is sound. Its a fav of mine. Nice to see someone provide both sides in one posting. Here its been the traders showing only their one side and then me having to come in with the other side. To keep the discussion balanced. For the benefit of the joe average trust investor. So he can get the both sides. So he Can get some facts concerning the both sides and the other failings according to the real world trust data. Then from that he can make a informed decision in regards to his own circumstances and preferences. -------------------- Peter and Lorne...the bickering is counter productive. ------ That bickering and more importantly Lorne's refusal to stick to facts and data when it comes to debating is more than that. Now in past a member asked Lorne to stick to the facts and data in the arguments and leave the name calling and insults out of it. To this very day he refuses to do so. Now the others for the most part allow that to continue. Again and again I ask Lorne to produce counters of fact and data for his side of the argument. His choice is to stick to the name calling and insults. And for the most part the others just allow it to continue. Well if thats the kind of discussion they want. I guess thats the kind of discussion we get. Now many of the lurkers here have learned to look past the name calling and insults and stick to the facts and data that are provided to make up their own minds as to what they should be doing for themselves. Those others that can't well thats just a shame but they can thank Lorne for much of that. --------

To: Ron Everest who wrote (3747)	7/25/2002 5:16:38 PM
From: Scott Mc	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11633

Yes I agree 100%, and my(1-3 yr)goal is to get up to 400K in trusts. There is a large risk using borrowed money, but I think no more that if you bought rental property, maybe less. With REIT's you could make a case for an appreciating asset increasing the payout and the NAV over time.. It is very hard to determine risk/reward, however it gets back to my question about "what is the difference between putting $200K into REIT's versus rental property?" I have in the past owned rental property(with a mortgage), and being a long term hold with a steady stream of cash flow I wasn't concerned about day to day prices(its such a pain to sell anyway). Scott

To: Ron Everest who wrote (3747)	7/26/2002 12:38:30 AM
From: Lorne Larson	Read Replies (7) \| Respond to of 11633

Re: The bickering is counter-productive. Maybe, but I just can't let Pompous Peter's wacko theories pass by without comment. Among the latest: 1. A holder from Nortel from $120 to $2 has suffered a loss, but a holder of NCF from $18 to $10 hasn't. 2. If you have cash to invest, and already hold an oil and gas trust, it is ALWAYS better to buy more of that trust than another trust. 3. It is ALWAYS a mistake to substitute an oil and gas trust for another oil and gas trust, if you are in a losing position on the trust you are going to sell. There are many, many more of these ridiculous pronouncements, which are elaborated with lengthy, incoherent, blither. When one fails to respond to the blither, the fool than proclaims that he has made his point. I guess I could live with it, if this was not all done with such incredible arrogance. A brilliant person who is arrogant is tough to stomach, a fool who is arrogant is unbearable. I apologize to all the posters on this site who have to put up with this, but I have made up my mind that I'm going to harass this jackass for as long as he posts on this site.