Ironical isn't it ..

[Bricks & Mortar]

Dont hybernate just yet BATBOY!!

Seech,

I appreciate views, even when they are contrary to mine,
I will disclose I DO have a vested interest in Navra, even though it's a very
small amount.
But I value the forum
because everyone has a different view
and shares it with each other.

I'm also aware of forumites who are associated with investED
and I hope that they aren't the only ones who are posting PM & you.

by the way the bit about people in grass houses cracked me up!!


cheers


Timm

 

[geoffw]

And people in grass houses shouldn't get stoned

See Change

From badpuns.com (and no, I have never been to this site before today)

In the days of primitive tribes and grass huts, there was one tribe which was very warlike. They won many battles, and took control of many other tribes.

One of their customs when they beat another tribe was to take the most prized posession of the enemy's chief.

One time, after a particularly fierce battle they defeated a rich tribe, whose king had a prized solid gold throne.

Our warlike tribe took the throne, and put it in the loft in their cheif's house. Unfortunately, the throne was much too heavy to be kept in a loft in a grass house, and it fell right through the ceiling, onto the cheif, killing him instantly.

The Moral of this story is...... People who live in Grass Houses shouldn't stow thrones!

 

[yadreamin]

I for one apreciate threads like this from sea change and others.
SC always posts informative and intelligently.

Questions get asked and answered in many different ways/opinions.

One then questions certain investments in a much more informed manner instead of just following the heard or the bull promoting the investment.

Isn,t that what the forum is all about?

Learning, Due Diligence, [by themselves or others] and seeking many different avenues of reaching their goal?????????????

So go Sikem Seach

cheers yadreamin

 

[see_change]

No, it wasn't worth making. Looking back over your posts you definitely seem to have a vendetta against Mr Navra. You will obviously disagree with this and probably feel justified in making your comments.

What exactly was the purpose of this thread?

TakeStock

Interesting that you enter this thread Take Stock. I was going to ignore it but considering your past record on this forum I thought it should be replied to considering your first post on this forum was this effort

I agree with Nigel.

Steve is currently involved with the establishment of a couple of other projects and has undoubtedly sunk quite a few dollars into them. At this stage, he is diverting his money towards these other projects. I do remember Steve stating that he would purchase someone's shares a while ago, however, I don't think that was meant to be extrapolated into an open invitation for all time.

Cheers

TakeStock

So what exactly is your involvement with Steve ?? I note that on this current thread it's Mr Navra. I know the involvement Steve of most of the other people defending him on this thread .

I know and respect the contribution of all of the other people ( except yourself at this stage ) on this thread . I have met Steve several times going back to 2001 ( The Wife's first BBQ in Canberra ) and I do respect him and no I don't have a vendetta against him but I do reserve the right to raise questions about him and anyone else who I think should be questioned ( as should anyone else on this forum ). I sure that Steve doesn't always appreciate being questioned , but if you're going to build up a successfull business there are always going to be people who question what you are doing. I'd guess that on a scale of one to ten my questioning would be coming down well under the radar.

I'd say that only a very small percentage of my posts are in any way related to steve , however at this stage your batting over 50 % on Navra related posts. One could hardly say you are an unbiased participant in this thread.

See Change

 

[MJK]

Quarterly- ASX 200- 8.5%, 2.6%, 7.7%, -2.5%
Navra- 10.2%, .27%, 4.82%, 0.78%

They would have received a performance fee for Quarter 1 and Quarter 4 (if quarter 4 had ended today); the performance fee would have effectively left a zero return to unit holders. (edit: in Quarter 4 only)

Geoff,

Could you expand on that? Show us the maths? The bit about the performance fee leaving zero return to unit holders in Q4 hypothetically.

MJK

 

[Takestock]

So what exactly is your involvement with Steve ??

I have no direct involvement with Steve Navra, other than I respect him and have some money in the Navra fund.

but I do reserve the right to raise questions about him and anyone else who I think should be questioned

Exactly - which is why I reserve the right to question what the purpose of this thread was (which is the only part of the previous post you conveniently forgot to answer).

One could hardly say you are an unbiased participant in this thread.

I don't recall anyone saying I was or wasn't biased (except for yourself). I simply note that you have, if not a vendetta, then a perverse infatuation with Steve Navra.

I decided to follow your lead and post a small selection from the smorgasbord of posts you have written that involved Steve Navra...interesting reading.

"Maybe this may well sound like sour grapes but I know I've talked to a few people who are frustrated that given the leg up that steve got from his participation in this forumhe no longer participates in this forum."

"It's not a scheme that allows you to buy shares ( as promoted on Invested ) , but a scheme promoted to allow you to Invest more funds in his managed funds."

"Wouldn't say I have an Axe to grind with Steve."

T"he final thing that I do find frustrating about Steve is his tendancy at times to dismiss other people style of investing , before raising his own suggestions ."

"But Steve was actively being negative and discouraging about certain strategies which have been successfull for many people on the forum."

"Didn't Narva used to have their performance charted against the ASX on their web site. I can only see the funds performance now."

"Surely those on the forum who are bored with questions re Navra should have learnt to ignore these posts by now "

"Maybe I'm wrong , but to me this is something that affects the foundations of Steve's structured approach, and was the main reason I have concerns about his approach "

Mmmm, don't know about you, but there seems to be a certain theme running through these, don't you think?

But anyway, back to the original question; what was the purpose of this thread?

 

[see_change]

But anyway, back to the original question; what was the purpose of this thread?

Maybe if you re read the original thread post you might realise

I actually think there are some worthwhile comments amongst those quotes of mine , though there are much juicier ones out there ....

See Change

 

[Takestock]

Yep, read it, but still can't figure out what its purpose was...other than what I have previously said. And I have absolutely no idea what its connection with property investment is...can you enlighten us?

 

[see_change]

Yep, read it, but still can't figure out what its purpose was...other than what I have previously said. And I have absolutely no idea what its connection with property investment is...can you enlighten us?

Connection with property ... No I'll conceed it doesn't have much connection with property as such . Connection with this forum yes.

Still can't figure out what it says ? Sorry I'm not into remedial lessons in english or comprehension . ( though with my spelling at times , maybe I should have some ...)

See Change

 

[geoffw]

Geoff,

Could you expand on that? Show us the maths? The bit about the performance fee leaving zero return to unit holders in Q4 hypothetically.

MJK

MJK

First, I am a unit holder. That's why I want to see how the performance goes. I would like it to do well.

Second. Figures for the ASX200- http://www2.standardandpoors.com/spf/xls/index/ASX200_20060601_G1YTOT.xls

30 Jun 05- asx200 4277.49
30 Sep 05- asx200 4641.16
30 dec 05- asx200 4763.47
31 mar 06 - asx200 5129.71
31may06 (yesterday) asx200 5001.67

Which gives the asx200 percentages I've shown

Navra figures are from www.navrainvest.com.au - "performance calculator" (Australian retail fund)

Start date 30 Jun 05, end date 30 sep 05- Performance is given as 10.2%
Start date 30 Sep 05, end date 31 dec 05- performance 0.27%
Start date 31 dec 05, end date 31 mar 06 - performance 4.82%
Start date 31 mar 06, end date 31 may 06 (yesterday)- performance 0.78%

Performance fee- last quarter to date:
Navra 0.78% (which is NOT negative as was implied in an earlier post)
ASX200 -.25%

Navra has outperformed the ASX 200 in this quarter so far by 3.28%.

This the number I'm not quite sure of. If the Navra outperformance fee is 25% (is that right?) of how much it outperforms the ASX200 then, if the results for the end of this quarter were to match yesterday's results, then with Navra @ .78%, ASX200 @ -2.5% Navra has outperformed @3.28%. 25% of that is .82%- but the actual performance was .78%, so that the performace fee would make the the result to the unit holder very slightly negative (IF the fee had been charged quarterly and not annually).

Annually, I'm happy. 16.72% returned as at 31 May 06. Close to the index.

The US fund though is not doing as well.
The US fund though

 

[Mikhaila]

Interesting how all the Navra fans are now happy that the fund is now outperforming the ASX.

Has The Navra fund made money in the last month ??

No ...

It just hasn't lost as much as the ASX.

Now they're outperforming the ASX they get more money .

See Change

SC,

I am a bit surprised by your comment. Yes, fund lost about 2.5% in a last 30 days. Platinum International Fund (an outstanding manager) lost about 3 % in the same period, even they do sell short. Are there funds who didn’t loose money in the last 30 days? Are there traders who made money in the last 30 days? May be. I am even sure there are few out there. Why do we concern with 30days performance? Not sure.

The index outperformance works in both directions – on the way up and on the way down. Outperformance is outperformance the bigger the better - seams trivial to me.

I had and still have actually my concerns about some of the performance claims made, and even reduced my exposure to the fund due to that, however honestly don’t see anything ironic in the current situation.

 

[see_change]

Didn't need to think I had to spell this out but as more than on eperson has raised the issue ....

The irony is that inorder for Navra Invest to make money , thier clients had to loose money...

Maybe some people don't class that is Ironical , but I think it is.

See Change

 

[Jamie]

The irony is that inorder for Navra Invest to make money , thier clients had to loose money...

Maybe some people don't class that is Ironical , but I think it is.

See Change

Doesnt EVERY fund that loses money still charge their shareholders a fee?

How many other funds only charge their members a fee if they dont perform to a certain standard? Can you name any?

And Seech - after 5 years and nearly 3,000 posts, its lose, not loose. People dont "loose" money, they "lose" it

Jamie

 

[geoffw]

Didn't need to think I had to spell this out but as more than on eperson has raised the issue ....

The irony is that inorder for Navra Invest to make money , thier clients had to loose money...

Maybe some people don't class that is Ironical , but I think it is.

See Change

The point of my previous post was...

Navra have not yet lost their clients any money at all. I am a client- and I am yet to lose money.

In May, the fund went down, and yes, granted, not as much as the ASX200.

But you have said that inorder for Navra Invest to make money , thier clients had to loose money

From my figures in a previous post:

1. If they had charged annually (which they have so far) their clients have made money- around the level of the ASX200. That's still not too bad. A managed fund might have performed the same- but charged a reasonable commission regardless of performance.

2. If they had charged quarterly (which they will) they STILL would have outperformed on two quarters. One was positive, one neutral (or slightly below)- and that quarter hasn't finished yet.

 

[Bill.L]

Hi all,

When I first read this thread, my first reaction was 'gutsy comment seech'.

And yes the irony was easily spotted for any who cared to look.

I always find it interesting how having a financial interest clouds peoples perceptions. As soon as anyone, and in this case Seechange, offers an opinion that is contrary to the financial interests of some, the words 'vendetta' or the like come out.

Having a difference of opinion in an investment approach, and then pointing out certain "weaknesses"? of something does not constitute a flawed character who must be then villified.

Seech
I have a suspicion I know the types of PMs that you have received, and I wish you luck with the replies you give, for some will not even bother to acknowledge that you have replied.

bye

 

[see_change]

Doesnt EVERY fund that loses money still charge their shareholders a fee?

How many other funds only charge their members a fee if they dont perform to a certain standard? Can you name any?

And Seech - after 5 years and nearly 3,000 posts, its lose, not loose. People dont "loose" money, they "lose" it

Jamie

Yes Jamie , my spelling is not my strong point and I've made frequent references to this in the past .

Geoff , I did make the point in my original post that this was in the last month .....

I said Irony , not disaster.

Bill, I think it is sad how financial interest clouds peoples judgement , even more so when they think they are anon.

See Change

 

[Glebe]

I'm not a Navra shareholder so I'm not fussed about the Navra reputation, but I'd rather financial education rather than criticism. I don't really think I'm learning anything from this thread.

 

[Ajax]

Mikhaila,

you posted "(the Navra) fund lost about 2.5% in a last 30 days. Platinum International Fund (an outstanding manager) lost about 3 % in the same period, even they do sell short."

I have some funds with Platinum (MLC Mkey Platinum super). I see from last Wednesday's Fin Review that the Platinum International Fund (Unit trust) was up 27.35% over the last 12 months, 18.51% pa over the last 3 years and 10.49% p.a. over the last 5 years.

How do these figures compare with the Navra trust?


Ajax

 

[AlmostBob]

dont "loose" money, they "lose" it

Jamie

Completely off the topic but,,,,
except for the loose change in my pocket

runs away madly, "they're coming to take me away ha ha"

or in this context "there coming two tach mi r weigh ha ha"

 

[Aceyducey]

Interesting point SC,

Keep bringing up what you see in the market (including views on oil stocks).

Someone in this forum needs to be willing to step up and make a call when they believe that the Emperor if, not completely naked, is wearing only a G-string.

Otherwise forums such as this becomes self-congratulation clubs and not somewhere where you can get more advanced financial education (Glebe do you learn more from people patting you on the back for doing right or my pointing out where you could do better?)

In this case I see points on both sides. Which is as it should be in a vigorous debate. In some things there are no right or wrong answers, only opinion.

My two contributions to this debate:

1) Any Navra investors who have read this thread and reacted emotionally - think again about whether you're protecting your ego (your decisions) or your investment. SC may be right or wrong, your view may be right or wrong but for YOUR investing future it's best to make decisions based on the investment, not emotions. It's a natural tendency for all of us to defend what we believe past the point of ration (yes I do it too) - hence so many pointless wars, strange corporate positions and poor investments.

2) I'm not yet convinced the Navra fund will thrive in the market. On an initial look at the fund before it started, there was a lot of pressure to get money in at the start - and rightly so to have the fund get sufficient funds to operate. This led to a situation where I believe some people may have been pushed into investing in order to 'not miss out'.

My decision was to wait three-five years, see if the fund survived commercially and then have a look at investing. If it did well, I'd have lost at most three years profit, the downside was much greater.

This is a different type of investment to property and it is an alternative to many other investment options (plus had a cashflow bias), thus my opportunity cost was minimal.

Right now I'm still undecided about the fund. In the same environment, in the same (share) marketplace, I've been able to outperform the fund with minimal effort. The fund is not out-performing other alternatives and frankly sits in the pack investment-wise.

Now while I like to back the people I know and trust (and I've known Steve for years and at one stage was involved with InvestEd - long and painful story that resulted in me losing respect for someone else), I also have to see that they can provide superior returns. In this case I'm not convinced, though I know and appreciate that various people are happy with their investment in it.

Everyone has their own goals, tolerances and abilities and the fund - like many other funds - will suit some people some of the time.

Cheers,

Aceyducey