The road to damascus

[BBarnes]

Perhaps everything from property, to Navra, to Freeman Fox, to Ostriches, should appear under one umbrella Caveat Emptor heading ? Once that's accepted as a given, maybe people could openly and honestly discuss opposing (or not) views without causing a s***fight.

Hi, Carl,
I can't, for the life of me, see that by transferring all posts to Caveat Emptor is going to avoid a s***fight.
If it's gonna happen, it's gonna happen.
And if it's gonna happen, let's hope everyone follows the example of GP and turns the bunfight into a meaningful, balanced debate where nobody feels like an outsider because of their views and beliefs. If I don't follow someone's ideology, I don't want to attack them...I'll merely debate it in a logical manner, or I'll change tack and walk away from it.
We're all different..each in our own comfort zone, and each doing our own DD. We're all different...we're not all right, and we're not all wrong.
Accept it as a part of life.
Time for Soccer, folks..............
Bill

 

[Bill.L]

Hi all,

Seech, you are a valuable member of this forum. You give your opinion in an open and honest way without fear or favour. That is exactly what this (and any other) forum thrives upon.

I still disagree about the post of mine you mention, but that is just a difference of opinion.

I fully agree about the agressive way many participants with a financial interest defend an argument. I have never attacked a person, but received plenty of personal attacks for disagreeing with a few types of investments and giving arguments/what if scenarios against them.

When any promoter of investments (for a price, whether 'education' or 'system' etc) comes to this forum, they should expect to get a grilling on their style/investment philosophy. Yet what too often happens is the platitudes from the converts, while many who doubt do not post so they will not be flamed.

Here is a question for Try Hard, Takestock and other eager members of Invested.

Should I join the Invested Forum?? Why or Why not??

bye

 

[TryHard]

We're all different..each in our own comfort zone, and each doing our own DD. We're all different...we're not all right, and we're not all wrong. Accept it as a part of life.
Bill

Totally accepted without reservation

Should I join the Invested Forum?? Why or Why not??

Probably depends on whether you feel you would gain anything, and/or if you have anything to offer, Bill. Why not, indeed

Cheers
Carl

 

[skater]

To be fair, I think Steve has gone to some length to explain his methodologies, allowing people to make better-informed decisions. While some may be blindly following, I don't think anyone who's followed the discussions here or at his seminars can complain that they were blindly led.

I agree with you on this point. Steve has always been upfront with everything, but you will always get a flow on effect from people who see well respected members invest in a vehicle & just follow without doing their due-dilligence. This is what I mean by saying people are blindly led. This is why I personally don't like all the continued ramping up of Steve & his funds. This, of course, would be fine if we were ramping up all the other funds too, or comparing the pros & cons of comparable funds.

As I said in another post, I am not anti-Navra, I just don't like the fact that his funds continually get a lot of free advertising on this forum when he, himself, no longer contributes.

Maybe we should have another heading in the forums like "Other Investment Vehicles" or "Managed Funds" where he (and his partners etc) and any other fund manager can discuss managed funds, shares, tea-tree plantations etc. Either that or stick all Navra stuff into Caveat Emptor.

 

[Kenny]

Hi Seech,

Perhaps I should apologise for bringing the thread back to the beginning. I must admit not to have followed much of the Navra pro/con debates so I can't comment there.

I am interested in the rationale behind your "change of mind" statement. Were you thinking that managed funds should have more of a place in your portfolio (knowing you are a keen share investor) or that fund managers should be part of your portfolio. I would assume this would mean not just Navra but the PPT & AMP's of the world.

Regards,

Kenny

No I'm not self medication , not bashed up and despite what people might think , this was a serious post.

There are so many intelligent ( and I mean that , Nigel etc ,he knows I respect his ability greatly ) who believe in Steve and are part of what I consider to be part of the Somersoft leading indicator that despite all my reservations , maybe I should think about investing in some Navra shares .

Zero to over 100 mill in funds in a couple of years with no main stream marketing is impressive.

Isn't someone allowed to change their mind ?

Isn't that what we're all here to do . Learn .

See Change

 

[see_change]

Try hard , I think this bit that Kenny has posted explains my reason.

There are so many intelligent ( and I mean that , Nigel etc ,he knows I respect his ability greatly ) who believe in Steve and are part of what I consider to be part of the Somersoft leading indicator that despite all my reservations , maybe I should think about investing in some Navra shares .

Kenny

I have always considered that managed funds will be part of my portfolio.

Because we are in the middle of a development , I don't have any money in there at the moment . All our spare funds are parked in offset accounts or in LOC. Once we have finished this I do my due dilligence on which manged funds I will be investing in .

Kenny I currently hold shares in AUW , which triggered a buy on one of my systems , I didn't specifically target it because it is in the wealth Creation business.

See Change

 

[TryHard]

Ok Seech - I think I understand. Because an influential group of people whose opinion you respect appear to believe in Steve Navra's strategies, you are considering buying shares in the company (these being the unlisted version) because of potential future growth ?

But whether or not you would consider Navra Invest (ie. the units in the managed fund) or any other managed fund is subject to future DD.

I'm not paraphrasing to be a smart a*** - just want to make sure I understand the meaning of the post. Given the NavTrade system is a pretty major component in Navra's performance and future, I can't see how anyone would throw dough into the company if they aren't comfortable with its trading methods ? Although I suppose that could be like buying shares in Channel 10 even if you hate their programming, which must happen, so maybe its not that unusual ?

Cheers
Carl

 

[geoffw]

Tryhard

I won't speak for anybody else on the forum.

I have some funds with NavraInvest.

They've done OK- I guess matching the ASX200 (more or less) to date.

The methods sounded interesting, enough for me to have given it a go, with non-hurt money.

He describes his methods as being "reactive", not "predictive". So the system reacts to a share price movement, instead of trying to predict (say through techincal analysis) where it will go. And he uses fundamental analysis to determine what shares whould be bought.

But, in a way, that comes down to semantics. Because any system which sets out to make money is fundamentally predictive. Steve's system just uses different methods to "predict" what shares will do well.

I'd guess (without having analysed- sorry) that a system which uses a different methodology than many ("contrarian" as Steve calls it) will have times when it has a success, and times when it does not. It's quite possible that it will outperform the market in some circumstances. And, as we've seen, it may not always match the market. Ity would be great if it outperformed more often than it did not. The performance has not been long enough to determine this.

I choose to keep some Navra funds as one part of a portfolio which I hope will perform well in the long term.

My SMSF may have some Navra shares; it also has some Freeman Fox shares and funds, as a part of this portfolio.

 

[GreatPig]

a system which uses a different methodology than many ("contrarian" as Steve calls it)

Steve's system is very similar to, if not actually based on, the Lichello AIM algorithm. It was designed in the late 1970's as an investment strategy for range-bound markets.

It seems there are a lot of people playing with this algorithm, but I have no idea how many are actually using it live, or for managed funds.

Cheers,
GP

 

[geoffw]

GP

First- your link didn't work. Perhaps the link http://home.earthlink.net/~beand/cpt/aimbasic.htm does

That may well be the case. I don't know a great deal about share systems.

But, just based on a quick impression- the Luchillo system seems to be based on price ("buy low, sell high") without perhaps the consideration Steve puts on the stock selection ("only buy those which are financiually sound" in effect).

It may well be based on existing "systems". That's not at issue.

But whatever reasoning- there will be strategies which match, outperform, or underperform the market. And I guess that will depend on a lot of things.

With all respect to Steve- a strategy which on average matches the market- but which only charges when it outperforms, but charges somewhat more than average when it does, will perhaps match the fees of other funds in the long term. But:
.the fund will have more motivation to perform (as against the standard who charge a percentage of funds invested)
.Investors will be more motivated to invest in a fund where the managers get recompensed for performance.

 

[GreatPig]

First- your link didn't work

Still works fine for me. Did you use the secret decoder ring?

just based on a quick impression- the Luchillo system seems to be based on price ("buy low, sell high") without perhaps the consideration Steve puts on the stock selection ("only buy those which are financiually sound" in effect).

As far as I know, the Lichello algorithm is based purely on the price of a particular stock, and doesn't consider the selection of stocks at all. However, the main criteria is that they have a certain amount of volatility, and don't strongly trend in either direction (a strong uptrend will still make money, but soon leave the fund 100% in cash).

there will be strategies which match, outperform, or underperform the market

There's a very simple strategy for outperforming any falling market - it's called ING Direct.

GP