Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators
Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site
Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?
Forum rules
Tight HYP discussions only please - OT please discuss in strategies
Tight HYP discussions only please - OT please discuss in strategies
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 6139
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:12 pm
- Has thanked: 1589 times
- Been thanked: 1801 times
Re: Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?
If I voted no in a Poll worded as "Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?" you'd be none the wiser as to what my no means. In my case it would be I haven't owned HYP1 since it was developed some 19 years ago so I haven't voted in order not to mislead.
Those who have held for 19 years are probably few and far between. Many here were not on TMF back in the day.
Those who have held for 19 years are probably few and far between. Many here were not on TMF back in the day.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 2829
- Joined: November 7th, 2016, 8:22 am
- Has thanked: 68 times
- Been thanked: 1029 times
Re: Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?
PinkDalek wrote:If I voted no in a Poll worded as "Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?" you'd be none the wiser as to what my no means. In my case it would be I haven't owned HYP1 since it was developed some 19 years ago so I haven't voted in order not to mislead.
I'll be stunned if there are any votes for Yes in this poll.
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 6139
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:12 pm
- Has thanked: 1589 times
- Been thanked: 1801 times
Re: Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?
Wizard wrote:I'll be stunned if there are any votes for Yes in this poll.
Yes!
You probably missed my second paragraph which I added whilst you were typing.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: May 2nd, 2018, 12:01 pm
- Has thanked: 730 times
- Been thanked: 1117 times
Re: Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?
I thought HYP1 was only a virtual portfolio Did I miss something?
Ian
Ian
-
- The full Lemon
- Posts: 10371
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
- Has thanked: 3601 times
- Been thanked: 5229 times
Re: Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?
PinkDalek wrote:If I voted no in a Poll worded as "Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?" you'd be none the wiser as to what my no means. In my case it would be I haven't owned HYP1 since it was developed some 19 years ago so I haven't voted in order not to mislead.
Those who have held for 19 years are probably few and far between. Many here were not on TMF back in the day.
I think it was indeed rather badly worded, but I take the essence to be "have you owned a HYP for a very long time and left it untinkered". If you haven't owned a HYP for long, don't bother to answer.
However, it's a wonderful wording for us all to have a pendant mode discussion which would probably be more entertaining than going out in this dull weather.
Actually, I'm off to hunker down for a snooze...
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: May 2nd, 2018, 12:01 pm
- Has thanked: 730 times
- Been thanked: 1117 times
Re: Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?
Arborbridge wrote:However, it's a wonderful wording for us all to have a pendant mode discussion which would probably be more entertaining than going out in this dull weather.
Do you not mean "a pedant mode discussion" rather than an adornment hung from a chain?
Ian
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 6139
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:12 pm
- Has thanked: 1589 times
- Been thanked: 1801 times
Re: Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?
No Pendant was quite deliberate I believe. It was an oft used ‘joke’ back at TMF.
-
- The full Lemon
- Posts: 10371
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
- Has thanked: 3601 times
- Been thanked: 5229 times
Re: Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?
PinkDalek wrote:No Pendant was quite deliberate I believe. It was an oft used ‘joke’ back at TMF.
Of course, you are correct - it was. But I have to confess I've repeated the same typo that gave rise to the original joke!
Perhaps it's a Freudian slip: I am a sort of swing voter.
Arb.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 3523
- Joined: November 7th, 2016, 1:56 pm
- Has thanked: 1546 times
- Been thanked: 1402 times
Re: Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?
Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?
But HYP1 has been tinkered with.
What would be interesting to see is what HYP1 would look like now without any of the additional actions applied by pyad following the various corporate actions. Presumably it would have a chunk of cash sitting it and not be generating as much income as it does now.
A question for another thread perhaps.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 2829
- Joined: November 7th, 2016, 8:22 am
- Has thanked: 68 times
- Been thanked: 1029 times
Re: Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?
Really interested to know who has owned HYP1 since 2000.
-
- The full Lemon
- Posts: 11276
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 5:04 pm
- Has thanked: 2468 times
- Been thanked: 5763 times
Re: Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?
Wizard wrote:Really interested to know who has owned HYP1 since 2000.
I can’t imagine anyone just blindly putting real money into that HYP just because Stephen put it together. That would be very unFoolish imho. Whatever happened to doing your own research? I voted no in the above poll.
Ian.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 3488
- Joined: November 5th, 2016, 10:30 am
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 1145 times
Re: Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?
idpickering wrote:Wizard wrote:Really interested to know who has owned HYP1 since 2000.
I can’t imagine anyone just blindly putting real money into that HYP just because Stephen put it together. That would be very unFoolish imho. Whatever happened to doing your own research? I voted no in the above poll.
Ian.
Like Ian I'm not sure if any readers at the time HYP1 was proposed would have just copied pyad but supposing someone had a lump sum to put into a one hit HYP at about the same time as pyad made his demo they would, if following the standard HYP guidelines, probably have bought something similar. Of course pyad did a few more demo HYPs including some monthly purchase versions and I'm sure some readers followed his picks.
-
- The full Lemon
- Posts: 10371
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
- Has thanked: 3601 times
- Been thanked: 5229 times
Re: Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?
kempiejon wrote:idpickering wrote:Wizard wrote:Really interested to know who has owned HYP1 since 2000.
I can’t imagine anyone just blindly putting real money into that HYP just because Stephen put it together. That would be very unFoolish imho. Whatever happened to doing your own research? I voted no in the above poll.
Ian.
Like Ian I'm not sure if any readers at the time HYP1 was proposed would have just copied pyad but supposing someone had a lump sum to put into a one hit HYP at about the same time as pyad made his demo they would, if following the standard HYP guidelines, probably have bought something similar. Of course pyad did a few more demo HYPs including some monthly purchase versions and I'm sure some readers followed his picks.
I "more or less" followed his HYP4 picks, but by then had at leat some information about the results from the previous HYPs so I could see the method was promising.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 2829
- Joined: November 7th, 2016, 8:22 am
- Has thanked: 68 times
- Been thanked: 1029 times
Re: Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?
kempiejon wrote:idpickering wrote:Wizard wrote:Really interested to know who has owned HYP1 since 2000.
I can’t imagine anyone just blindly putting real money into that HYP just because Stephen put it together. That would be very unFoolish imho. Whatever happened to doing your own research? I voted no in the above poll.
Ian.
Like Ian I'm not sure if any readers at the time HYP1 was proposed would have just copied pyad but supposing someone had a lump sum to put into a one hit HYP at about the same time as pyad made his demo they would, if following the standard HYP guidelines, probably have bought something similar. Of course pyad did a few more demo HYPs including some monthly purchase versions and I'm sure some readers followed his picks.
I agree, but somebody has said they did by voting yes in the poll.
-
- The full Lemon
- Posts: 10371
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
- Has thanked: 3601 times
- Been thanked: 5229 times
Re: Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?
moorfield wrote:Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?
But HYP1 has been tinkered with.
What would be interesting to see is what HYP1 would look like now without any of the additional actions applied by pyad following the various corporate actions. Presumably it would have a chunk of cash sitting it and not be generating as much income as it does now.
A question for another thread perhaps.
I'm not sure it would be very helpful Ultimately, all shares would cease to exist and the result would be a cash pile.
HYP1 might have been bought as a lump sum, but the HYP method does require limited tinkering to keep the generating process going. Otherwise, it is no longer a HYP.
-
- The full Lemon
- Posts: 10371
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
- Has thanked: 3601 times
- Been thanked: 5229 times
Re: Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?
Wizard wrote:kempiejon wrote:idpickering wrote:
I can’t imagine anyone just blindly putting real money into that HYP just because Stephen put it together. That would be very unFoolish imho. Whatever happened to doing your own research? I voted no in the above poll.
Ian.
Like Ian I'm not sure if any readers at the time HYP1 was proposed would have just copied pyad but supposing someone had a lump sum to put into a one hit HYP at about the same time as pyad made his demo they would, if following the standard HYP guidelines, probably have bought something similar. Of course pyad did a few more demo HYPs including some monthly purchase versions and I'm sure some readers followed his picks.
I agree, but somebody has said they did by voting yes in the poll.
This might just mean that someone has used an alternative translation of the poll question - guessing at the spirit of what it meant rather than taking it literally. Taken literally, there would be no "noes" at all - and don't ask me "how does it smell then?"
Arb.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 3523
- Joined: November 7th, 2016, 1:56 pm
- Has thanked: 1546 times
- Been thanked: 1402 times
Re: Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?
Arborbridge wrote:I'm not sure it would be very helpful Ultimately, all shares would cease to exist and the result would be a cash pile.
Ultimately, we too cease to exist. Which happens first, on the average, I wonder ...
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 2829
- Joined: November 7th, 2016, 8:22 am
- Has thanked: 68 times
- Been thanked: 1029 times
Re: Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?
ReallyVeryFoolish wrote:True to form, maybe half the posts are about the wording of the question. It would have been easier to just click no. Anyway, thank you for voting, we have two very long term HYP1-ers. Remarkable.
Thank you.
RVF
Without understahding the question the poll is useless, surely?
It seems, 3 people bought HYP1 in 2000, it would be incredibly helpful if they could post how each looks now for comparison with pyad's.
-
- The full Lemon
- Posts: 10371
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
- Has thanked: 3601 times
- Been thanked: 5229 times
Re: Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?
Wizard wrote:ReallyVeryFoolish wrote:True to form, maybe half the posts are about the wording of the question. It would have been easier to just click no. Anyway, thank you for voting, we have two very long term HYP1-ers. Remarkable.
Thank you.
RVF
Without understahding the question the poll is useless, surely?
It seems, 3 people bought HYP1 in 2000, it would be incredibly helpful if they could post how each looks now for comparison with pyad's.
It would indeed be very instructive.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 4255
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:17 am
- Been thanked: 2628 times
Re: Have you owned HYP1 since it was developed and it is still untinkered with?
ReallyVeryFoolish wrote:IanTHughes wrote:I thought HYP1 was only a virtual portfolio Did I miss something?
That's partly the question underlying the poll. Is it virtual or is it real? ...
I'm certain that it is a virtual portfolio, because various things that pyad has said (and indeed not said on occasions) about it indicate that he didn't put real money into it - as an example, see https://web.archive.org/web/20170212182 ... sort=whole, in which it became apparent that pyad had missed a corporate action that reduced the size of its original holding Blue Circle Industries about a month after the initial selection of the portfolio, which only became apparent when the holding was taken over several months later. Making a mistake about the amount of money one has available to reinvest is rather hard to do in a real-money portfolio, but it's dead easy to make such mistake due to a missed corporate action in a virtual portfolio...
I suppose it would have been possible for someone to have gone out and bought HYP1 on the same day that they first read about it, which could have been as early as the day the article selecting it was published, i.e. November 13th, 2000. But there have been various indications over the years that pyad 'bought' it on the previous day - which would have been quite reasonable, given that the article would have needed to be checked and approved by TMF before publication, and clearly HYP1 must have been developed before it could have been 'bought'. So speaking as a pendant ;-) even someone who read the article on the day that it was published and bought HYP1 the very same day (which I very much doubt that anyone did) is at least a day short of having owned HYP1 since it was developed!
But the value of HYP1 mainly lies in the fact that it has been mostly run in a publicly visible and checkable way for 19 years now and there are dated records of the decisions made in running it that mostly give little scope for the use (whether intentional or unintentional) of hindsight in arriving at them - there are exceptions where quite a bit of hindsight could have been used, but generally one can check that the differences between the various courses of action that could have been taken after the fact are very small compared with the total size of the portfolio. That value is there regardless of whether it's a real-money or a virtual portfolio - except that many posters (though not all) will be much more reluctant to post details of their real-money portfolios, and/or more reluctant to do "let's see how this works out" experiments with real money.
ReallyVeryFoolish wrote:... And why does it's discussion seem to stir on the (odd occasion) seemingly a rather emotional response for something almost unheard of away from TLF and TMF before it? ...
Sorry, but I don't think I can answer that question without going seriously off this board's topic of running HYPs in practice - and as regards answering it on other boards, I would certainly find it at least hard work and possibly impossible to answer it anywhere without breaking TLF's rule "Stick to the facts and argue the points discussed, rather than criticise the poster."
Gengulphus
Return to “HYP Practical (See Group Guidelines)”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests