Les said:
G'day Domcc1,
I clicked on your link (above) out of interest, but it led me to a number of "Steve McKnight" articles. When I chose one of those, it then drilled down to another suite of articles - none of which seemed to involve Steve McK - is the link at fault?
Was there a specific link that you were wanting to display?
Regards,
Yes, apologies, those first few results don't lead to any articles and thanks Geoff for pointing them out.
I wasn't really trying to point out any in particular, just general comments (rants?) Neil has on Steve McK.
I personally am undecided about wraps. If both parties are willing and benefit in some way, then prima face it seems like a good thing. It was great to hear the other side of this story (I hadn't actually read the article you're reffering to but it sounds like one where Neil talks about how wrappers are evil loan sharks that kick battlers out of their home).
While it's sad, I also find it hard to sympathise with them in this case. If I didn't pay my rent for 14 days on my place I'd be out the door quicker than you could pack my belongings! I totally agree with you 100%.
There are some posts on jenman.com where Steve McK and Neil have a discussion about wraps. Steve's response seemed pretty reasonable - he said something along the lines of that it's just a small number of wrappers that give wrapping a bad name.
For me personally, the only thing that Neil raised and that I'm still unsure about the whole wrapping strategy is what happens to a wrappee (who meets all of their payment and other obligations in a timely manner) if the wrapper defaults on their loan with the lender? The risk seems to lie on the wrappee here however if they are aware and accepting of this risk then again, maybe this is OK also.
If any pro-wrappers are keen on arguing their strategy and how this is not a problem you'll win hands down as I'll admit I don't have much experience with wrapping at all! (make sure to take it easy, please
).
The other thing Neil has a go at Steve McK, John Fitzgerald and others about is their wild 'make $74,567 in 3 months' or '$1m in one year from scratch' claims. Again, undecided on if this is simply advertising or trickery. I mean, it's not impossible but it's also not very probable.
While sometimes I find Neil a little too strong on the 'anti-spruiker' / 'doom and gloom' side he certainly does do a lot of good work by exposing the definatley dodgy (I'm not talking about wrappers, I'm talking about European Land Sales, dodgy agents, High pressure / free flight Queensland stuff, Henry Kaye et al, etc). In an industry that has more sharks than the ocean, I welcome his take on things even if it's ultra one sided (but do not take it as gospel of course!).
Oh, BTW I thought the Bill Zheng / investors direct seminar was excellent! Some new content and certainly new angles and takes on various aspects on finance, wealth psychology and investing. He did some comparisions with the US and the UK which I enjoyed. The Micheal Yardney / Metropol presentation was also quite good. I highly recommend the seminar.
Which reminds me, Bill presented a very interesting angle of viewing spruiker like activities. He asked, if a spruiker charged you (ripped you off?) $5k in purchasing an IP for $87k in 1985, would you be upset at them? (please note - I do not condone spruiking, just an intersting thing to think about!).
The Wakelins one was good as usual, although they teamed up with a finance presentation which was just too low level for me (and it appears others as well). It must be hard to know what level of investing experience to aim these presentations at but hearing how 'you can actually use equity in your unencumbured PPOR to buy 1 IP' just put me to sleep.
