Arborbridge wrote:The yield isn't defined, but it is determined - determined
not by the investor, by the procedure which Kempiejon succinctly outlined:
Absolutely, pick a selection of shares, highest yield in any sector that meets safety factors and diversification, that's the jist of how we pick HYP shares isn't it?
So it's determined by the highest yielders
We're not necessarily disagreeing. You're saying buy the highest yield in a sector allowing for safety factors and diversification. And so am I. It's just that I have a broader and deeper set of safety factors than you do, and so I may find that the yield on the eventual pick ends up being lower.
However I don't accept the idea that the yield of your portfolio is determined totally by external factors. There is room for individual influence over that.
Arborbridge wrote: I do not agree with Lootman's suggestion, or that buying a UK tracker would fulfill the HYP brief.
You're taking my words a little out of context there. What was I saying is that IF your overall yield requirement from the portfolio is at or below the market yield THEN an investor does have other options to achieve his goals, like an index fund or using IT's. These may be useful if one is reaching the point in life where it's becoming too much work to run a portfolio of individual shares. It was cited as an eventual exit strategy from HYP and not as a HYP option itself.
Arborbridge wrote:However, this is NOT the strategy board, so would should continue any resultant nit-picking on the HYSS board. I thought it important on this board to point out that Lootman is being disingenuous concerning HYP yield.
There are always going to be topics that straddle the two boards and perhaps this is one. But my earlier comments covered a number of very practical issues such as:
1) How to determine the target yield of a HYP
2) How to capture growth and safety of dividends
3) How much to allocate to HYP versus other strategies
4) How to ensure better diversification
5) Why capital can matter even if you decide that it doesn't
I may have wandered a little, but "disingenuous" is a harsh characterisation. And enough other commentators echoed those ideas indicating that they were of practical use for others.