HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: pao@wam.umd.edu (Nikos Strifas)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Warrants Observation
Keywords: warrants
Date: 17 Nov 92 01:16:16 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Workstations at Maryland, University of Maryland, College Park


Netters,
Here's one personal observation on warrants that I think is correct but
you might disagree with me....

I have been playing/looking at the NASDAQ SMALL CAPS section of BARRON'S
for a year or so. Well, all of these stocks do not have options. So, I
noticed that every time one of these little guys got HOT the corresponding
warrant(s) -depending with expiration date & target price- took a couple
days & simply doubled. A recent example is INVI which 2 days ago got
HOT & its warrant got DOUBLED.

Takis Vouganis
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: gary@intrepid.com (Gary Funck)
Subject: Re: C-SPAN & 1929 !
Organization: Intrepid Technology, Inc.
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 16:21:49 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.225250.3355@gumby.dsd.trw.com> suhre@meltami.dsd.trw.com (Maurice E. Suhre) writes:
>In article <1992Nov10.011635.26341@intrepid.com> gary@intrepid.com (Gary Funck) writes:
>>
>>Lowering rates has the
>>effect of giving new life to debt-ridden, marginal corporations,
>>and helped to keep the banking system afloat -- possibly long enough
>>to sustain a recovery.  But, as usual, it will be the taxpayer
>>that picks up the tab for this action.
>
>It isn't obvious to me how the taxpayer "picks up the tab" for lower
>interest rates.
>

The relationship is indirect, and arguable.  My point was that if we support
an economic system which keeps weak businesses and banks afloat, we hurt
ourselves:
(1) weak businesses generally block progress and job growth
(2) weak businesses cannot compete as well in a global market
(3) lower interest rates will lower the yield on conservative, long-term
investments.  This forces individuals to take on higher risk, or accept
a lower level of real income.  As the TV economists noted, lower real income
decreases tax revenues, which raises govt. debt.  Higher risk investing
encourages speculation (not usually in a productive sector), which damages
the stability of our financial markets.

- Gary
-- 
| Gary Funck  		    gary@intrepid.com  [uunet!uupsi!intrepid!gary]
| Intrepid Technology Inc., Mountain View CA (415) 964-8135
--
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: floydb@rpi.edu
Subject: re: Investing after retirement: How do I maximize income?
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 15:47:55 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.230148.556@rdii.com> jas@rdii.com (Jim Smith) writes:
>My mother-in-law (a very nice lady) has decided at age 70 that she
>has had enough and is selling her house in New Jersey and moving
>to a retirement trailer park in Las Vegas.  

stuff deleted

>Jim Smith
>-- 
>jas@rdii.com                  | "If you put tomfoolery into a computer, nothing
>Opinions (tm) property of     | comes out but tomfoolery. But ... having passed
>James A. Smith, Sr. Engineer  | through a very expensive machine, ... no one
>Racal-Dana Instruments Inc.   | dares criticize it."  Pierre Gallois



Knowing next to nothing you should begin reading magazines and books on
investing for retirement. Your local Librarian should be able to help you
find the section on investing money and they may have a sizable collection
of subscriptions.

Unsollicited information from mutual fund companies should be thrown out
and/or ignored. Every quarter many publications list all available mutual
funds (surveyed by the Lipper financial service company) and their rank
within dozens of categories (e.g. fixed income, growth, bio-tech, etc.).
Again, ask your local Librarian for help.

High current income usually equates to higher risk. Preservation of principle
may not be a necessary part of your investment requirements but keep this
in mind.

Beyond investing I have found it helpful for me to sit down with a few sheets
of paper and my check book to determine where I spend my money and why. Paying
for certain things on the 1st of the money and others on the 15th of the month
(regardless of when the bills are due, remember most companies don't come 
after you until a bill is 30 - 60 days past due) helps coordinate income and
outgo, it also drastically reduces the amount of time I spend tracking finances.

Once you know what, when and why money is being spent, draw up a long term
budget (1, 3, 5, 10 years) with average expenses. This will tell you how
much income is needed and/or how long your principle will last if you are
getting 0% return. $10k/yr in expenses gets you 5 years of living off of
$50k. $5k/yr covers 10 years, etc. Now factor in a flat 5% return ($2500)/yr,
and this tells you that an additional $7500 to $2500 has to come from
somewhere.

Homework first before looking at particular companies will save you a great
deal of worry. 

2 cents worth

barry


Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: watanabe@cs.uiuc.edu (Larry Watanabe)
Subject: Re: 10 Highest Yielding Dow Stocks
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 00:30:29 GMT

floydb@rpi.edu writes:

>the 11/19 Wall Street Journal has an interesting
>article about the biggest companies in 1982 vs 1992.
>Many are not so big anymore (based on market cap.).

>Their stock prices have either plummeted (e.g. IBM) or
>declined significantly or have not increased at or above
>market rates. 

>Their conclusion is that buying and holding todays 
>darlings gives you a 60/40 chance of losing out.

>barry

Buying and holding is a relative term.
Almost everyone buys and holds their stocks for at least 1 second.

Almost no-one buys and holds their stock for 100 years.

When people recommend buy and hold, what they are
usually recommending is to buy and hold for at least
6 months to a year. The Wall Street Journal article 
doesn't provide evidence against this strategy.

-Larry Watanabe watanabe@cs.uiuc.edu
From: jb6k+@andrew.cmu.edu (Joel Bloch)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Re: Newbridge
Date: 21 Nov 92 17:49:07 GMT
Organization: Doctoral student, English, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

First, all the networking stocks have been hot - Wellfleet, 3-com etc.
Newbridge also reported higher than expected earnings. Louis Navillier,
who has been the hottest newsletter writer in Hulbert's survey, has also
been very high on the stock for the last few weeks.
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: etpeters@dal.mobil.com (E. T. Peterson(Eric))
Subject: Re: Where is the best place to stick it?
Organization: Mobil Exploration & Producing Technical Center(MEPTEC), Dallas. 
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 23:05:06 GMT

In article <5685@bacon.IMSI.COM>, jordan@IMSI.COM (Jordan Hayes) writes:
|> Gary Heston <gary@cdthq.UUCP> writes:
|> 
|> 	Wipe out the credit cards, put the rest in investments, and put
|> 	the money you were paying on the cards into either more
|> 	investments or partying.
|> 
|> There's the point: people who pay off that debt will *not* be inclined
|> to "pay back" the original lump.  In a sense, if you inherit $100k, and
|> you use $20k of it to pay off credit card debt, you've "loaned" one
|> account to pay another.  Now you're losing return on that $20k.  If you
|> don't take the original cash flow you were paying for debt service and
|> "repay" the $100k account, you're down for the long run.
|> 
|> The numbers make sense: it's the actions of individuals who will in
|> fact party instead of putting the money back that leads me to say
|> "stick with the cash flow" of debt service.
|> 
|> /jordan


So, in effect, you are advocating paying an outrageous amount of interest on
your "debt service" in order to enforce self-discipline on your finances.
Sounds like "service" to the credit card companies!  I challenge you to show
some numbers supporting the idea that it is better to invest your money at, say,
10% taxable income, instead of paying off a debt at a non-deductible 18%!

This is a big price to pay to protect me from myself!

***********************************************
Eric Peterson
e-mail:  etpeters@drsol1.dal.mobil.com
phone:  (214) 951-3251 
 
--  The sooner you fall behind,
           the more time you'll have to catch up! 
***********************************************


Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: acheng@ncsa.uiuc.edu (Albert Cheng)
Subject: Re: IRA Rollovers (was Re: Offset 401(k) Rollover Withholding)
Originator: acheng@shalom.ncsa.uiuc.edu
Organization: Nat'l Ctr for Supercomp App (NCSA) @ University of Illinois
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 16:03:10 GMT


In article <1992Nov12.213037.26151@cbnewsc.cb.att.com>, jld@cbnewsc.cb.att.com (J. L. David) writes:
>In article <BxM5wq.GCC@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, acheng@ncsa.uiuc.edu (Albert Cheng) writes:
>> 
>> And also remember, IRA allows you taking rollover
>> only ONCE a year.  Be careful.
>
>This is only true if you take possession of the money.  There is no
>limit on the number of trustee-to-trustee IRA rollovers that can be
>made in one year.

According to IRA publication, trustee-to-trustee "moving" is called
"Transfer", not Rollover.  And yes, there is no limit of Transfers
per year.

Rollovers are withdraw of asset and then deposit back into another
IRA.  That has a 12 months period limit, i.e. within 12 months (starting
the day you RECEIVED the distribution), you cannot make another withdraw
from the same IRA account.  But, you can make withdraw from another
IRA source (thanks to the person who sent me the correction.)  The IRS
publication gives an example:

    You have two IRA accounts, IRA-1 and IRA-2.  You made a withdraw
    from IRA-1 and deposit into IRA-3.  That is a rollover.  You are
    not allowed to make another withdraw from IRA-1 within the
    following 12 months.  But you can make one withdraw from IRA-2 to
    deposit to IRA-3.  The IRS publication does not say if one is
    allowed to withdraw from IRA-3 in less than 12 months after the
    first rollover.

Standard disclaimer: I ain't no tax accountant.  You should check the
publication yourself.
From: jb6k+@andrew.cmu.edu (Joel Bloch)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Re: Snapple and abortion issue
Date: 16 Nov 92 08:17:56 GMT
Article-I.D.: andrew.8f1yLIy00iV403vGQV
Organization: Doctoral student, English, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

Snapple was one of the first big sponsors of the Rush Limbough radio
show, which should tell you something about their politics. There was an
interesting article about how a lot of sponsors don't want to advertise
on the show because of its controversy, but not Snapple
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: bucknerb@bnr.ca (Brent Buckner)
Subject: Re: Stocks vs. Bonds
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ontario, Canada
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 02:10:48 GMT

In article <1426500295@igc.apc.org> mcaldon@igc.apc.org (McAldon International Inc.) writes:
>
>|This is similar to idea of dollar cost averaging: you are 
>|buying the most shares of your mutual fund when it is
>|performing the worst.
>
>Looks to me as if what you're recommending is averaging down. Dollar-
>cost averaging entails investing a fixed amount at regular intervals,
>without regard for market pricing.
>

No, this is actually a simple form of value averaging.  It 
tends to perform slightly better than dollar-cost averaging.

>|If bonds are performing badly, that means that they have
>|become cheaper relative to stocks. Similarly if stocks
>|are performing poorly relative to money, they have become
>|cheaper and that is the time to buy more of them.
>
>Also known as bottom fishing; easy to say, hard to accomplish'
>

Not on an automatic rebalancing system (as described).

>|You want to buy at the bottom, and sell at the top.
>|That would mean that you want to buy stocks just when
>|they are performing the most badly, and to sell them
>|just when they are performing the best. So, the
>|trend may not always be your friend.
>|-Larry Watanabe
>
>Have you found that fabled bell that rings at bottoms and tops?
>We've all been looking for it.  DMcKenzie

People following value averaging formulae are not making any
such claim.
 
-- 
at Bell-Northern Research
voice:        (613) 765-2739
Canada Post:  P.O. Box 3511, Station C, Ottawa, Canada, K1Y 4H7
I do not claim that BNR holds these views.  
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: venky@thelonious.bellcore.com (G A Venkatesh)
Subject: Re: How to Protect Capital Gains?
Reply-To: venky@thelonious.bellcore.com (G A Venkatesh)
Organization: Bellcore, Morristown NJ
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 20:44:33 GMT

In article <y9z1x+a@rpi.edu> floydb@rpi.edu writes:
>
>
>>3) You could buy puts. You can't get called on the options and you
>>   don't realize any profit this year from the transaction. You
>>   lock in the sale price even if the stock goes down. If the stock
>>   goes up, you could sell the put options at a loss or you could
>>   let them expire worthless. If you don't want to loose much on
>>   the put options and you don't think the stock will go up too
>>   much in the next two months then you could buy puts in the money
>>   at a strike price six months out (April/May). With the stock
>>   price staying the same time-value will have little impact and
>>   intrinsic value will remain constant, you might loose 10% to time
>>   plus commissions.
>>
>I forgot to mention that in choice 3) the value of the put options
>goes up as the stock goes down. Of course the potential capital
>gain on the retained stock decreases. However, if you buy in the
>money put options to begin with then the decreasing stock price
>could increase option intrinsic value faster than the decrease
>in time-value so that the value of the options increase or remain
>constant.
>

Not directed at the above answer but considering all the games one can play 
in Wall Street, why is gambling still illegal in parts of the US?

venky
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: floydb@rpi.edu
Subject: Re: 10 Highest Yielding Dow Stocks
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 15:03:47 GMT

the 11/19 Wall Street Journal has an interesting
article about the biggest companies in 1982 vs 1992.
Many are not so big anymore (based on market cap.).

Their stock prices have either plummeted (e.g. IBM) or
declined significantly or have not increased at or above
market rates. 

Their conclusion is that buying and holding todays 
darlings gives you a 60/40 chance of losing out.

barry

Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: luchini@nhmfl.fsu.edu (Marco Luchini)
Subject: Re: Medium and Long-term Direction of the Dollar (esp vs Dmark)
Organization: Department of Physics, Florida State University, Tallahassee
	32306, USA
Date: 16 Nov 92 03:31:26

In article <24560008@hpgnd153.grenoble.hp.com> errol@hpgnd153.grenoble.hp.com (Errol Inan) writes:

> In the U.S. interest rates and inflation are at par.  Demand for American
> products has been declining the since around 1980, as seen by a net deficit of
> imports minus exports.  As a result, the dollar was hammered throughout most
> of the 80s.

Not quite correct.  Only in the last part of the 80's, starting with the
Plaza accord has the dollar entered a bear phase.  For most of the 80's
the dollar was in a raging bull market caused by the high interest rates
of the early Reagan years.


Ciao,							Marco

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marco Luchini          Internet (Preferred): luchini@theory.nhmfl.fsu.edu
Department of Physics                        Bitnet:     LUCHINI@CZHETH5A
Florida State University                     Telephone:   +1 904 644 5075 
Tallahassee, FL 32306, USA                   Fax:         +1 904 644 6504
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: gpalo@digi.lonestar.org (Gerry Palo)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Re: Inflation Coming? (Gold?)
Date: 16 Nov 92 18:37:50 GMT
Organization: DSC Communications Corp, Plano, TX

In article <24560004@hpgnd153.grenoble.hp.com> errol@hpgnd153.grenoble.hp.com (Errol Inan) writes:
>Yes.  Higher inflation.
>
>No.  Don't buy gold or gold stocks.
>
>For the last ten years, gold's price seems to have had more to due with
>production capabilities than inflation.  When the price goes up, producers
>crank up mines and thus the supply.  Eventually the price starts to drop.
>
>When the price goes down, the high-cost mines get closed, and thus gold
>production goes down.  The price gets driven back up.
>
>The net effect being no great change in gold prices.
>
>If you still want to play it, go with gold stocks.  Gold stocks are cheap
>(Homestake Mining - $11) so in the short term, you might make some money.  Long
>term however, you won't hit the jackpot.  As for trading the pure commodity,
>the commissions are high, and the price movements are not as great as the
>resulting price movements in gold stocks.
>
>Regardless, as I've said, changes in gold prices have more to do with
>production than inflation.
>
>I don't really know much about other precious metals.
>
>Probably real-estate and currency plays are the way to go if higher inflation
>is on the horizon (in the old U.S. of A).

It is hard to believe that real estate will go into another
inflationary spiral, what with the enormous overbuilding and
the absence now of investment tax incentives, capital gains
exemption, and a risk-protected banking industry (although
apparently the $100k guarantee is still in effect).  Do you really 
think that real estate will be a good inflation hedge?

If not, is there anything else, other than dicey currency plays,
and gold/gold stocks?  I guess the question is, what is it that 
will go up in the next inflation of the currency?
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: pearson_steven@tandem.com (Steven R. Pearson)
Subject: Re: Mutual Funds Fees - 12b-1s, in particular
Organization: Tandem Computers Inc.,  Cupertino, CA
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 17:57:35 GMT

In article <1efiomINNge8@agate.berkeley.edu>, braver@magnolia.Berkeley.EDU (Michael Braverman) writes:
> 
> All other things being equal, if I'm trying to decide between two
> mutual funds, A and B, whose total annual fund operating expenses 
> are the same, but fund A doesn't charge 12b-1 Fees, whereas fund B
> does, is there any reason to prefer A over B or vice-versa?  That is,
> as an investor, am I only interested in to bottom line operating
> expenses (which already include any 12b-1 fees, if any), or does the
> presence of 12b-1 fees have some hidden sinister consequences?

I would probably favor Fund A.  The reason being that there is some chance
that the overall expenses of the funds might decrease over time (esp. if the
fund does well and grows).  I would bet that in most cases, the 12(b)1 portion
of annual expenses would remain fixed, so Fund A has a slightly better chance
of having lower fees in the future than does Fund B.  This would not be a strong
criteria for me, because all other things are rarely equal.  But if they were (as
far as I could tell), I would avoid the 12(b)1.

Another reason (you have to decide for yourself if it's sinister) that 12(b)1
fees might be a negative would be if you have a relationship with a broker
or financial planner who sold you the fund.  In this case, chances are high
that that person is getting a steady stream of income as long as you are in the
fund.  Your advisors investment recommendations may be somewhat biased,
even subconsciously, toward the fund that's paying them.

In fact, I was in a fund that was quite up front about its intention of adding
12(b)1's because it figured it could convince us that they would help retain
shareholders, and over time would actually reduce overall operating expenses.
I didn't buy it, and bailed (having already paid a load to get in, I couldn't see
paying a yearly commission on top of that).  Frankly, I believe they were just
doing the usual BS of hiding part of the commission.  They lowered the front
end load at the same time.  Long term holders actually would end up paying
more in commissions than before, but the fund was at the same time more
marketable because of the lower front end take.  Needless to say, now that I
know a stock from a hole in the ground (RELP, anyone want to buy one? :-),
I am firmly in the no-load camp.

-steve p.  (opinions mine, no warranty, standard disclaimers)
From: jordan@IMSI.COM (Jordan Hayes)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Re: Where is the best place to stick it?
Date: 19 Nov 92 18:37:25 GMT
Organization: Investment Management Services Inc., NYC

Steven R. Pearson <pearson_steven@tandem.com> writes:

	it might be wise to pay off any expensive debt you have ...

I see this all the time, and I just don't understand it.  The way I see
it, current debt service is just a cash-flow item.  If I were a
student, living a student life, and I suddenly inherited $100k, I sure
as heck wouldn't pay down my credit cards.  All that would do is
decrease dramatically my $100k, and increase only marginally my cash
flow.  Since this money is indeed "found" I would have had to deal with
cash flow and current debt service anyway.  I should continue doing
that (after all, I enjoyed the goods I purchased on credit, now I
should pay for them).

I think it's important psychologically to keep your investments and
your quality of life separate.

/jordan
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: tcifelli@bmerh717.bnr.ca (Tony Cifelli)
Subject: Re: buying foreign currency for the little guy
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Canada
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 16:07:47 GMT

In article <adwright.721923340@vincent1.iastate.edu> adwright@iastate.edu () writes:
>I am interested in buying foreign currency on a small scale. Is it possible 
>to get, say Swiss Francs or Yens at a Bank in the form of Travellers Checks
>and just cash them in for dollars later on? Would i need to have proof that 
>i intend to travel to that country or can just anyone get them? Am i missing
>something or would this be an easy way for a little guy to invest in foreign 
>currency? Any advice, opinions, or references to books would be appreciated.
>Allen
>
Yes you can do this.  You don't have to be travelling.  You can buy 
travellers cheques anytime.  I am Canadian and buy US dollars that 
way because AMEX gives a better exchange rate than the banks give.

You obviously don't earn any return except on a foreign exchange play
though if you hold the currency.  You'd be better off (if your willing
to risk) to buy the currency and invest it in bonds or stocks in that
nation.  Directly or through mutual funds.

regards,
   Tony.

tip: I believe the Canadian dollar is undervalued at present and would
     consider it a (slightly) attractive investment for a medium (2-5 year)
     play.  IMHO. 
--
[Tony Cifelli              ][Phone:    613-765-2798   ][BNR is not accountable]
[Bell-Northern Research    ][FAX:      613-763-2714   ][for the opinions      ]
[P.O. Box 3511, Station C  ][Internet: tcifelli@bnr.ca][expressed herein.     ]
[Ottawa, On. K1Y 4H7 CANADA]["Still looking for a dramatic quote to put here!"]
From: louis@cs.mcgill.ca (Louis LECLERC)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: I'd like to invest in Asia, what's the best way?
Date: 23 Nov 92 02:38:51 GMT
Organization: SOCS - Mcgill University, Montreal, Canada


 
I have about $5000(us) which I would like to invest in Asia. I am looking
for a fund (perhaps something like the Tiger Fund) which invests in
Asia, but is denominated in either European currency, or the Japanese Yen
(preferably).
 
 I don't want an Asia fund denominated in US dollars as I fear that lots of 
new spending in the US is going to be paid for by printing money over the
next few years. (hence inflation).
 
Should I try and find a Japanese/European investment house to do this,
or are domestically run funds better and less risky?
 
How would you approach this problem. I'd appreciate your experiences/ideas
or suggestions.
 
Thank You;
 
Louis Leclerc
louis@binkley.cs.mcgill.ca
Newsgroups: misc.invest