re: My Take On The DIY Debate

quote:

---

The fact that you think people come on here and read posts and make portfolio allocations purely on the suggestions of a poster speaks volumes for your understanding of wtf gets talked about around here. You're taking this way to seriously

---

Say what you want, the guy in an earlier post just said he invested in a bond fund based on something Jersey said.

You may have the common sense not to, but I would be willing to bet you anything some people on here do just that

quote:

---

Say what you want, the guy in an earlier post just said he invested in a bond fund based on something Jersey said.

---

Really? You want to dig that quote up for me, cause I didn't see it.

I believe he said "Jersey tipped us off to a bond" not "Jersey told me to buy this bond so I did it." I'm just saying that tigerdroppings is, by definition, a discussion board, not a place to seek professional advice, and I think people understand that caveat.

quote:

---

I don't even know why you would bother talking in a forum where you can't offer any opinions. I do not know the regulations of your profession, but right now you're saying that you are held to a higher standard than a lawyer or a cpa, and I find that kind-of hard to believe.

---

That is exactly what he is saying and it is the truth.

What an registered representative ("RR") writes in a letter to a client or prospect, post on a forum or website, or what he/she even says in a public forum, such as a seminar or public speaking engagement, is under a set of strict rules.

Most items have to be cleared by the RR's broker-dealer compliance department before being made public.

A RR is subject to an audit by his broker-dealer, federal and/or state security regulatory body at any time. His entire office, client and prospect files, assistant duties, correspondence, personal portfolio and even the security level of his computer (just a short list) is open for audit.

This industry is highly regulated, much more than attorneys and CPAs. Those two are largely self-regulated.

Fair enough, I didn't know it was that strict. Hope you got all that other stuff cleared then.

1.) amsterdam, for whom do you work?

2.) if I want to create trusts or living wills, or shield myself from taxes, why would I go to a FA? as opposed to, say, an attorney?

3.) if you're so good at picking stocks, why are you an overworked (and most likely underpaid) employee?

4.) FAs' goals' aren't to make you alot of money. Their goal is to make ALOT of people a MODEST amount of money. As an FA, you can't take on the amount of risk required to make your cilents a large ROI because you'd inevitably fail half or more of the time and therefore lose your client base. Most of the people's goals on here, I presume, are to strike it big ... not to see measly returns on enormous sums of money just so you can keep your job. You can keep Grandma Molly who just inherited her husband's 2M when he passed ... but the big dogs never go to MOM&POP FINANCIAL SERVICES around the corner.

I don't mean to sound rude, but I find I can't help myself after reading multiple posts where you seem to be talking down to people who most likely take in more a year than yourself.

People like you are exactly why the wealthy tend to manage their money themselves ... to be frank: if you were so good at it, why not quit your job and trade stocks all day long.

I was talking about any of the stuff amsterdam said earlier (with respect to fund x y or z), not your comments on the cfa/cfp stuff. My bad for the mix up there.

Just to continue (not a loaded question): So my asking for a personal opinion about the status of any publicly traded security (like aig), even with a disclaimer, constitutes solicitation to the point that a RR cannot make a comment on it whatsoever? Does that change if a person unilaterally offers up their opinion, i.e. not a solicitation? As an example, how is that any different than any of the commenting related to the various American funds and all that stuff that went with it?

quote:

---

So you are saying you should try to time the market? Otherwise forgetting about would make sense.

---

boom

quote:

---

1.) amsterdam, for whom do you work?

2.) if I want to create trusts or living wills, or shield myself from taxes, why would I go to a FA? as opposed to, say, an attorney?

3.) if you're so good at picking stocks, why are you an overworked (and most likely underpaid) employee?

4.) FAs' goals' aren't to make you alot of money. Their goal is to make ALOT of people a MODEST amount of money. As an FA, you can't take on the amount of risk required to make your cilents a large ROI because you'd inevitably fail half or more of the time and therefore lose your client base. Most of the people's goals on here, I presume, are to strike it big ... not to see measly returns on enormous sums of money just so you can keep your job. You can keep Grandma Molly who just inherited her husband's 2M when he passed ... but the big dogs never go to MOM&POP FINANCIAL SERVICES around the corner.

I don't mean to sound rude, but I find I can't help myself after reading multiple posts where you seem to be talking down to people who most likely take in more a year than yourself.

People like you are exactly why the wealthy tend to manage their money themselves ... to be frank: if you were so good at it, why not quit your job and trade stocks all day long.

---

Threesheets god bless you man, but you couldnt be more off on all of that.

More specifically

quote:

---

I don't mean to sound rude

---

Look man I can only promise you one thing. That in no way can you have more than just the slightest clue about who I work for or my income level. Neither of which you will ever get.

Also

quote:

---

if you're so good at picking stocks

---

Never claimed to be, in fact its probably my least favorite security to recommend

quote:

---

No way is there a fair representation of conventional financial thought on this board.

---

This statement is very telling and quite fitting coming from you. The WHOLE IDEA is that "conventional financial thought" amounts to a sack of dogshit and is relentlessly peddled by people like you as if it is gospel. "Conventional financial thought" consists of things like "modern portfolio theory", "buy and hold" and "dollar cost averaging". I have no doubt that you are intelligent enough to pass exams that test you on such topics. The problem is, that way of thinking doesn't approximate real life very well.

Be honest: what were you telling your clients to do in September 2006? September 2007? September 2008?