Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site

POLL Would you like to see these additional investing boards?

Formerly "Lemon Fool - Improve the Recipe" repurposed as Room 102 (see above).

Would you like to see these additional investing boards?

The site would benefit from a "Value Shares" Board
46
37%
The site would NOT benefit from a "Value Shares" Board
9
7%
The site would benefit from a "Shares - Fundamental Analysis" board
42
33%
The site would NOT benefit from a "Shares - Fundamental Analysis" board
10
8%
Don't mind either way
18
14%
Other
1
1%
 
Total votes: 126

Clariman
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3268
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:17 am
Has thanked: 3077 times
Been thanked: 1557 times

POLL Would you like to see these additional investing boards?

#162573

Postby Clariman » August 28th, 2018, 11:51 am

There have been two threads running about the creation of additional boards.

Value board - suggested by TUK020 viewtopic.php?f=21&t=12978
Fundamental Analysis board suggested by Matt and Mel viewtopic.php?f=21&t=13230 - Although the Topic title was "Shares/Company Research" board, the consensus of discussion seems to be for a title of "Fundamental Analysis".

You have TWO votes in the poll which allows you to vote positively for or against each board.

Thanks
Clariman

Clariman
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3268
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:17 am
Has thanked: 3077 times
Been thanked: 1557 times

Re: POLL Would you like to see these additional investing boards?

#162588

Postby Clariman » August 28th, 2018, 12:25 pm

Feel free to comment, especially if you do NOT think a board is a good idea.

gryffron
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3605
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:00 am
Has thanked: 550 times
Been thanked: 1584 times

Re: POLL Would you like to see these additional investing boards?

#162624

Postby gryffron » August 28th, 2018, 2:35 pm

Isn't Value Shares just a subset of Fundamental Analysis?

So whilst I have no objection to any new boards, I don't see that BOTH of those would sit well together. In fact, very hard to choose which of those boards would be the correct place for a share value analysis.

Gryff

Gengulphus
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4255
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:17 am
Been thanked: 2628 times

Re: POLL Would you like to see these additional investing boards?

#162649

Postby Gengulphus » August 28th, 2018, 3:53 pm

gryffron wrote:Isn't Value Shares just a subset of Fundamental Analysis?

No. Fundamental analysis is a collection of tools for extracting hopefully-significant numbers and indicators from company reports; Value strategies are a collection of strategies that use fundamental ratios to drive their decisions. Neither of them is a subset of the other, any more than either of the set of all doctors and the set of all stethoscopes is a subset of the other!

But that does point out a possible flaw in my already-supplied answer to the poll that I think both boards would be good additions to the site. I gave that answer on an interested-in-principle basis - I think they'll be good additions if both have the necessary design work put into them, to get details like the board name, its subtitle and any necessary guidance put in place from the start and correctly reflecting the intended purpose of the board, and to make certain it has moderators in place who are willing to be suitably firm about holding it to that purpose. If a Value Shares board (in particular) is put in place without those, I think it's almost inevitable that it will attract posts from anyone who thinks a particular share shows value in any old way and anyone who wants to discuss a strategy that they think gets value out of shares, and will simply end up as Investment Strategies Mk2 cum Share Ideas Mk 2! That would be a very bad idea IMHO, because (among other things) it would be utterly and completely frustrating for anyone who was looking forward to discussing Value strategies...

So my answer to the poll should definitely be treated as "yes in principle, needs a fair amount of work in practice"! And don't be afraid to delegate the bulk of that work to someone who is a keen advocate of the board, telling them to come up with something workable, and in particular that makes it clear what the board is about, so that people who are interested in the subject are attracted, people who are not interested in it are not, and it is actually moderatable. It will still need some scrutiny by others and a final check that it is what people actually want.

Gengulphus

gryffron
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3605
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:00 am
Has thanked: 550 times
Been thanked: 1584 times

Re: POLL Would you like to see these additional investing boards?

#162665

Postby gryffron » August 28th, 2018, 5:01 pm

@Gengulphus: Good point well made.

In which case, I think "Shares - Fundamental Analysis" is an awful name. Because, as you can see from my previous comments, I read it as:

"[Results of] Fundamental Analysis of Shares"

Which IMO is always some sort of value indicator. Though, as G says, not always what a true "value" investor means by "value". Which can be as hard to define, and to stick to, as causes moderators so much grief on the High Yield board. :(

Perhaps, as Gengulphus says, the challenge for anyone asking for a new board is to define its name and subheading adequately well, so as to clearly show what the board is for, and avoid possible future misuse. If they can do that, and it clearly doesn't fit any existing board, then let them have a new one. Back to their original threads for that discussion?...

Gryff

mc2fool
Lemon Half
Posts: 7812
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:24 am
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 3017 times

Re: POLL Would you like to see these additional investing boards?

#162674

Postby mc2fool » August 28th, 2018, 6:17 pm

gryffron wrote:In which case, I think "Shares - Fundamental Analysis" is an awful name ...

Perhaps, as Gengulphus says, the challenge for anyone asking for a new board is to define its name and subheading adequately well, so as to clearly show what the board is for, and avoid possible future misuse. If they can do that, and it clearly doesn't fit any existing board, then let them have a new one. Back to their original threads for that discussion?...

I thought there was already agreement in the original thread that it should be called Fundamental Company Analysis and the strap line should be something along the lines of Analysing companies' finances and value from their accounts.

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=13230#p160533

TheMotorcycleBoy
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3245
Joined: March 7th, 2018, 8:14 pm
Has thanked: 2222 times
Been thanked: 587 times

Re: POLL Would you like to see these additional investing boards?

#162763

Postby TheMotorcycleBoy » August 29th, 2018, 7:04 am

gryffron wrote:@Gengulphus: Good point well made.

In which case, I think "Shares - Fundamental Analysis" is an awful name. Because, as you can see from my previous comments, I read it as:

"[Results of] Fundamental Analysis of Shares"

Which IMO is always some sort of value indicator. Though, as G says, not always what a true "value" investor means by "value". Which can be as hard to define, and to stick to, as causes moderators so much grief on the High Yield board.


mc2fool wrote:I thought there was already agreement in the original thread that it should be called Fundamental Company Analysis and the strap line should be something along the lines of Analysing companies' finances and value from their accounts.

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=13230#p160533

Yes, thanks to both of you. I wanted to say something earlier (about the name proposed in this poll) but I did not want to kill the momentum.

gryffron wrote:Perhaps, as Gengulphus says, the challenge for anyone asking for a new board is to define its name and subheading adequately well, so as to clearly show what the board is for, and avoid possible future misuse. If they can do that, and it clearly doesn't fit any existing board, then let them have a new one. Back to their original threads for that discussion?...


Between myself, Geng, and TJH, I believe a consensus defined here had already been reached on the heading and sub-heading. I'm not sure where these sentences were lost in the post.... But if others are in agreement I believe that last link I embedded nails it. Comments?

My main justification for making the original request was that Mel and I had been creating the odd topic where the main types of questions asked were based on analysing companies using the figures in their financial statements and applying ratios and calculations to those figures. In some cases we were unsure of the precise formation of the ratios and at other times the interpretation of the numbers which resulted, to one or more companies.

Thus the idea was one of valuing the company, and all it's securities really....i.e. the health of the company. Whereas, correct me if I'm wrong, I'm still a newbie after all, doesn't the whole "Value shares" thing really take into account the current (or desired) market price of a share, i.e. whether it currently does or will afford "value".

However, Mel and I's original questions really originated from reading share/company evaluation literature, and sometimes getting a bit confused upon application to real company accounts etc., and posting onto this forum.

Note that although I mentioned that the board I'd proposed, was not focused on the current market price of the share, some interesting share valuation recipes do crop from studying a company's financial statements, along with some outside data, e.g. P/E, P/Sales, P/NAV etc. And I as previously mentioned here we can combine several entities from inside and outside the company to discuss further equity valuation - which I'd assumed could occur on the same board I'd proposed.

Matt and Mel

TheMotorcycleBoy
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3245
Joined: March 7th, 2018, 8:14 pm
Has thanked: 2222 times
Been thanked: 587 times

Re: POLL Would you like to see these additional investing boards?

#162766

Postby TheMotorcycleBoy » August 29th, 2018, 7:12 am

So with my "current level of limited knowledge" on investment as sometimes discussed in this forum, I believe there is justification for both the proposed boards. That is, in my "current" understanding, they seem to be distinct.

Matt

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 18677
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 628 times
Been thanked: 6560 times

Re: POLL Would you like to see these additional investing boards?

#162886

Postby Lootman » August 29th, 2018, 2:34 pm

I voted "would not benefit" but the real option I would have liked was "will make the site worse".

There was a conscious decision made at the inception of TLF, as I recall, to have a much smaller number of boards than were at TMF, and collapse or merge many TMF boards that were related or overlapping. This has been very successful in my opinion, and perhaps more so since TLF can be accessed in a way that is independent of boards at all.

The problem with having overlapping boards (and I believe that both of these candidates are) is that they immediately cause confusion of the "shall I post it here or there" type.

It also means that if you are interested in that general area then you have more boards to look at to find what interests you.

Moreover it can lead to extra conflict and moderation, as we see in the one case where we do have two boards for one topic, i.e. HYP.

I do not regard "board creep" as a healthy trend, and I worry it will cause me more risk and effort as I will have to ponder more which board to top post on and/or what content I may or may not contribute given the narrower definitions that having more boards inevitably implies. Can we not just keep things simple and not over-complexify?

Ashfordian
Lemon Slice
Posts: 995
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 5:47 pm
Has thanked: 168 times
Been thanked: 160 times

Re: POLL Would you like to see these additional investing boards?

#162894

Postby Ashfordian » August 29th, 2018, 2:53 pm

The Value Shares board had died on TMF and I don't see what has fundamentally changed around share valuations that will make it a high traffic board here.

I would also rename the HYP Practical board the Doris Portfolio discussion board as it's remit is very narrow, much like the Trading my way to a Million board.

If we are lacking another 'broad church' board then create that, but creating further investing specific boards will just require more moderation. I'd prefer to give the moderators less work rather than a reason to perform more poor moderating actions and further antagonise the user base.

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 18677
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 628 times
Been thanked: 6560 times

Re: POLL Would you like to see these additional investing boards?

#162904

Postby Lootman » August 29th, 2018, 3:38 pm

Ashfordian wrote:The Value Shares board had died on TMF and I don't see what has fundamentally changed around share valuations that will make it a high traffic board here.

I would also rename the HYP Practical board the Doris Portfolio discussion board as it's remit is very narrow, much like the Trading my way to a Million board.

If we are lacking another 'broad church' board then create that, but creating further investing specific boards will just require more moderation. I'd prefer to give the moderators less work rather than a reason to perform more poor moderating actions and further antagonise the user base.

Agree. Let me take the point that Gengulphus made, but paraphrase it and change the perspective somewhat. The more boards you have, the narrower the definition of each board becomes, and the more need there is to have a clear and complete definition not just of the new board, but also of any old boards that are effectively having their own scope changed.

Now we could ask for a volunteer to write one, as suggested, but then that carries the risk that we will end up with that person's own personal preferences. And that the result will not be intuitive to many, leading to more problems, not fewer.

I think there might be half an argument for a FA board given that there is a TA board. But then there are more alternatives for discussing FA than TA anyway. "Value" is a somewhat subjective concept anyway. For example Google has a P/E ratio equal to the market average but is growing at 15% to 20% a year. Many might argue it's a value play whilst, to others, it's the exact opposite.

Board proliferation can easily lead to more confusion, conflicts and moderation, unless it is managed very carefully. Who here has the time, knowledge and inclination to do that?

Clariman
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3268
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:17 am
Has thanked: 3077 times
Been thanked: 1557 times

Re: POLL Would you like to see these additional investing boards?

#162919

Postby Clariman » August 29th, 2018, 4:16 pm

Lootman wrote:I voted "would not benefit" but the real option I would have liked was "will make the site worse".

There was a conscious decision made at the inception of TLF, as I recall, to have a much smaller number of boards than were at TMF, and collapse or merge many TMF boards that were related or overlapping. This has been very successful in my opinion, and perhaps more so since TLF can be accessed in a way that is independent of boards at all.

The problem with having overlapping boards (and I believe that both of these candidates are) is that they immediately cause confusion of the "shall I post it here or there" type.

Good points and thanks for the kind comment about TLF's approach. When we started the site there was no way we would have anywhere near as many boards as TMF because board proliferation is a problem for new users, even though they were logical at the time. Also, we felt loads of boards would be hard to structure cleanly and clearly for a new website using forum software that ex-TMF users were not familiar with. We also did not want to create orphan boards than had next to no posts.
I do not regard "board creep" as a healthy trend, and I worry it will cause me more risk and effort as I will have to ponder more which board to top post on and/or what content I may or may not contribute given the narrower definitions that having more boards inevitably implies. Can we not just keep things simple and not over-complexify?

I don't think we are planning wholesale board creep but one or two more to address common needs should be OK.

A question for those who support the idea of these new boards ....

Where do you currently post your Value Shares and Fundamental Analysis posts and what problems does that cause you or the site?

Clariman
(Site co-owner)

XFool
The full Lemon
Posts: 12636
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:21 pm
Been thanked: 2608 times

Re: POLL Would you like to see these additional investing boards?

#162999

Postby XFool » August 29th, 2018, 8:24 pm

For your consideration: Pension Policy board?

vrdiver
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2574
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 2:22 am
Has thanked: 552 times
Been thanked: 1212 times

Re: POLL Would you like to see these additional investing boards?

#163002

Postby vrdiver » August 29th, 2018, 8:39 pm

Clariman wrote:A question for those who support the idea of these new boards ....

Where do you currently post your Value Shares and Fundamental Analysis posts and what problems does that cause you or the site?

Clariman
(Site co-owner)

I was a subscriber to TMF's "Value Investor" magazine, which covered both Value shares and HYP picks, being careful to differentiate between the two. I enjoyed it (while it lasted) and would be a reader of a "Value" board, in the same way that I currently read both HYP boards.

If I was fortunate enough to find a share that I thought was "Value" today, I'd probably post in "Share Ideas". Ditto FA (although I haven't, so not sure if my hypothetical view should count...)

VRD

Gengulphus
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4255
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:17 am
Been thanked: 2628 times

Re: POLL Would you like to see these additional investing boards?

#163040

Postby Gengulphus » August 29th, 2018, 11:28 pm

Clariman wrote:Where do you currently post your Value Shares and Fundamental Analysis posts and what problems does that cause you or the site?

With regard to posts about fundamental analysis, Melanie (Mel and Matt) currently posts things like "Price to Book value and Next (NXT) shares" on Share Ideas. If you read it, you'll see that it's primarily about P/BV and only basically uses Next as a not very prominent example. I.e. it's much more about P/BV as a fundamental analysis concept than about Next as a share idea. And I think the ensuing discussion very much followed that lead - e.g. the first reply started "re. your request in the biscuit bar. First I won't comment about Next. I've never followed it and I avoid retail shares as they aren't within my circle of competence." And I suspect that most Share Ideas readers aren't really all that interested in discussing P/BV - they'll probably have made their minds up about its value or otherwise years ago!

I.e. I think that the post was very largely off-topic for Share Ideas, which means among other things that:

* Other future users with similar questions are likely to have trouble finding it.

* Future posters who want to quickly point someone with similar questions at an existing discussion about the ratio are similarly likely to have trouble finding it, unless it's something that they had thought "I'm likely to want to refer to that in future - better bookmark it" about when they originally saw it.

* Or indeed future posters might just want to point someone to a likely place to find previous posts about the subject and/or someone who can answer their question. E.g. if someone wanted to know what a cup-and-handle price pattern is, I know it's a technical analysis concept but basically nothing else about it. But that's enough to allow me to suggest the Technical Analysis board as the place to look/ask.

* Users who might well be happy to help a new investor with such things may well not find it (even if they do read Share Ideas, they might well think "Next - no, I don't know anything much about it beyond that it's not the type of company I'm interested in" and not read the thread at all).

* Users who are happy to help with them and do find them may nevertheless feel inhibited about replying, knowing that if the matter is reported as being off-topic, it may well be removed.

* If extensive general discussions of fundamental ratios whenever a reader doesn't know what they are become the norm on Share Ideas, happening in threads that didn't start off as being about the ratio as well as those that did, they'll badly reduce the usefulness of the board to its normal readers.

Because of those, I would almost certainly report such threads as needing to be moved to a more suitable board - if I could see a more suitable board! But at present, I can't: they don't really suit Share Ideas, but I can't see a better one. For instance, I've considered How Do I Invest, but its subtitle "Investment discussion for beginners. Why you should invest your money, get help getting started." and the threads it contains say to me that it's not very suitable at all: if a "for beginners" board showed them a list of stuff about weird combinations of letters that would only be useful to them if they decided to invest in individual shares and bonds, and that they probably wouldn't know was even that until they knew a bit more about investing, they would probably give up on the site on the spot! Basically, it's intermediate-level "how do I invest?" material, of interest to those who make some decisions about how to invest, not beginner-level material.

Anyway, I'm more likely to reply to others' threads about fundamental analysis than to start them myself, but I would certainly be more comfortable about doing so somewhere where they were clearly on-topic.

About Value shares, I don't actually think there's a need for a board specifically named "Value Shares", because I think Share Ideas does the job of generally discussing individual shares perfectly well. I'm perfectly happy for boards to co-exist with it that discuss individual shares suitable for a class of strategies specifically from that class's point of view: that allows a poster either to indicate that they're interested in the share from all perspectives by posting about it on Share Ideas, or to indicate that they are interested in it from a more specific point of view. But not for another board to exist besides Share Ideas that just discusses the shares generally, without any restriction on the strategies they're being considered for. (And as a board name, "Value Shares" doesn't IMHO provide a clear enough restriction on them: it's too easily misinterpretable.)

But I do think there's possibly a place for a board about Value strategies, and I would certainly use such a board, though probably more as a lurker than a poster. That's because although I started many years ago on TMF as an active user of a Value strategy, my strategy has evolved away from being a Value strategy in two different directions. One half has become HYP (I started my Value strategy in late 1999, nearly a year before pyad wrote his original HYP articles), which differs from being a Value strategy in terms of being income-focussed rather than capital-gain-focussed, and also by generally holding shares for much longer. The other half has become a smallcaps strategy (mainly AIM shares, and not infrequently pretty small even for AIM), with substantial Value aspects but with quite a significant admixture of various other elements: looking at what the company is trying to do (and whether it's something I feel I can support), at the management (and whether I feel I can trust them!) and what I think the market in their shares is doing / heading all come into it to significant extents. Adherents of proper Value strategies would almost certainly turn away from it in horror at best, and the chances that none of them would flame it are IMHO negligible...

So I don't think the home for any discussions of my smallcaps strategy would really be anything more specific than Investment Strategies, or possibly a Share Investment Strategies board if it existed. But I don't really want to discuss it anyway, basically because I think I have far more to lose than to gain by discussing it. In particular, a good number of the shares I buy for it are sufficiently small caps that my trades do quite significantly move the market in them, which means that I'm likely to move the market against myself if I discuss them before I trade and to be open to accusations of 'pumping and dumping' or other market manipulation if I discuss them after I trade... I really have no interest in doing either of those things, and so I won't be pressing for a Share Investment Strategies board or a more specific strategies board that would cover it!

Anyway, the point about all of that is that I'm interested in Value strategies both for the ideas behind them, some (but not all) of which are likely to be of interest in my own investing, and for any shares that get discussed specifically for them, as they will probably be a richer source of ideas for my strategies than Share Ideas. But that is dependent on there being other TLFers who use more clear-cut Value strategies than either of mine and want to initiate discussions about them...

What that does say is that I think the name of the proposed board should be "Value Strategies" rather than "Value Shares". The TMF board was called "Value Shares" and the OP of the thread suggesting such a board specifically said it was about an equivalent board, so I've been taking "Value Shares" as a working name for such a board. But the subject matter of the TMF board was definitely Value strategies and shares that might be suitable for them, discussed from a Value strategy perspective. If one wanted e.g. to discuss it instead from a technical analysis perspective, it was not a good idea to post on Value Shares: getting reported for being off-topic and having the post deleted (and its text returned to you for re-use elsewhere if you saw fit) was just about the friendliest likely response... (Having it gently pointed out that you were on the wrong board and being redirected to the right board would be friendlier, but about as likely as someone asking a meeting of a cricket club "I think your pitch would be ideal for conversion to a football ground - how about it?" being gently redirected to the football club down the road!)

But exact names, subtitles, guidance posts, etc, of a proposed board really need to be sorted out. Doing that properly requires a mixture of being keen on having the board, having the time and energy to sort it out, being willing to be constructive about it and essentially work on a "do the best job of designing it that we can, then get a decision about whether it's wanted" basis, understanding what the proposed board is about and (just as important!) not about, having the ability to see potential misunderstandings of what's said (knowing what it is supposed to mean is not enough), and having the ability to look at it from all of the perspectives of users who are interested in the subject, users who are not interested in it, moderators and the site owners. Any single TLFer probably won't manage all of that, and as Lootman says, getting it all done by one person risks ending up with that person's personal prejudices. But equally, the moderators and site admins have enough to do anyway, so I think the bulk (not all) of the work should be done by someone who really wants the board and people they can recruit to the task - but have to understand that at the end of the process, what they come up with has to get the site owners' approval (obviously, it won't get anywhere without that!), the moderators' agreement that it is something they can moderate, and a sufficient number of users' real interest to make the board worth having.

Gengulphus

TheMotorcycleBoy
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3245
Joined: March 7th, 2018, 8:14 pm
Has thanked: 2222 times
Been thanked: 587 times

Re: POLL Would you like to see these additional investing boards?

#163066

Postby TheMotorcycleBoy » August 30th, 2018, 6:16 am

Gengulphus wrote:
Clariman wrote:Where do you currently post your Value Shares and Fundamental Analysis posts and what problems does that cause you or the site?

With regard to posts about fundamental analysis, Melanie (Mel and Matt) currently posts things like "Price to Book value and Next (NXT) shares" on Share Ideas. If you read it, you'll see that it's primarily about P/BV and only basically uses Next as a not very prominent example. I.e. it's much more about P/BV as a fundamental analysis concept than about Next as a share idea. And I think the ensuing discussion very much followed that lead - e.g. the first reply started "re. your request in the biscuit bar. First I won't comment about Next. I've never followed it and I avoid retail shares as they aren't within my circle of competence." And I suspect that most Share Ideas readers aren't really all that interested in discussing P/BV - they'll probably have made their minds up about its value or otherwise years ago!

This really is the exact point, certainly in terms of the Fundamental company analysis questions which interested Mel and I. Thanks Geng.

Gengulphus wrote:...
* Other future users with similar questions are likely to have trouble finding it.

* Future posters who want to quickly point someone with similar questions at an existing discussion about the ratio are similarly likely to have trouble finding it, unless it's something that they had thought "I'm likely to want to refer to that in future - better bookmark it" about when they originally saw it.

* Or indeed future posters might just want to point someone to a likely place to find previous posts about the subject and/or someone who can answer their question. E.g. if someone wanted to know what a cup-and-handle price pattern is, I know it's a technical analysis concept but basically nothing else about it. But that's enough to allow me to suggest the Technical Analysis board as the place to look/ask.

* Users who might well be happy to help a new investor with such things may well not find it (even if they do read Share Ideas, they might well think "Next - no, I don't know anything much about it beyond that it's not the type of company I'm interested in" and not read the thread at all).

* Users who are happy to help with them and do find them may nevertheless feel inhibited about replying, knowing that if the matter is reported as being off-topic, it may well be removed.

* If extensive general discussions of fundamental ratios whenever a reader doesn't know what they are become the norm on Share Ideas, happening in threads that didn't start off as being about the ratio as well as those that did, they'll badly reduce the usefulness of the board to its normal readers.

Exactly. Valuable information is lost in the noise and the initial questions are poorly received.

Matt and Mel

TheMotorcycleBoy
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3245
Joined: March 7th, 2018, 8:14 pm
Has thanked: 2222 times
Been thanked: 587 times

Re: POLL Would you like to see these additional investing boards?

#163067

Postby TheMotorcycleBoy » August 30th, 2018, 6:22 am

Gengulphus wrote:...I would almost certainly report such threads as needing to be moved to a more suitable board - if I could see a more suitable board! But at present, I can't: they don't really suit Share Ideas, but I can't see a better one. For instance, I've considered How Do I Invest, but its subtitle "Investment discussion for beginners. Why you should invest your money, get help getting started." and the threads it contains say to me that it's not very suitable at all: if a "for beginners" board showed them a list of stuff about weird combinations of letters that would only be useful to them if they decided to invest in individual shares and bonds, and that they probably wouldn't know was even that until they knew a bit more about investing, they would probably give up on the site on the spot! Basically, it's intermediate-level "how do I invest?" material, of interest to those who make some decisions about how to invest, not beginner-level material.

In our minds, "How do I invest?", for the average person is more about things like ISAs, online trading platforms, 20k tax free limits, than it is ever about ratios due to analysing company records.

Matt and Mel

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 18677
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 628 times
Been thanked: 6560 times

Re: POLL Would you like to see these additional investing boards?

#163076

Postby Lootman » August 30th, 2018, 8:05 am

Gengulphus wrote:I suspect that most Share Ideas readers aren't really all that interested in discussing P/BV - they'll probably have made their minds up about its value or otherwise years ago!

I.e. I think that the post was very largely off-topic for Share Ideas

It depends. If you see FA as some kind of world of its own, then you might feel that way. But in practice FA is often just one of several ways of assessing a share. And in that case the "Share Ideas" board is the right board because if you are discussing FA then you are probably applying that methodology to a particular share. You've suggested that readers don't want to see that discussion on Share Ideas but I for one would like that.

So if I want to perform some FA on, say, Tesco, readers might want to see that post on the same board as other posts about Tesco, and not in some new FA board. Because that way they get all their Tesco information in one place rather than two. And I probably have no interest in reading about FA in isolation to any particular share.

Moreover we will get HYP-style fights where one reader will complain that "You posted that on the FA board but it's really a more general discussion for Share Ideas" whilst another will assert that "You posted that on Share Ideas but you just did some FA". Or "You just criticised FA on the FA board - it should be elsewhere as I never want to read anything negative about FA". Do we really need more of that?

Whereas with TA it is perhaps more likely that I'd want to discuss graphs, charts and patterns in isolation to the underlying, because any security can be analysed in the same way. But with FA that doesn't make a lot of sense, at least not to me.

IanTHughes
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1789
Joined: May 2nd, 2018, 12:01 pm
Has thanked: 730 times
Been thanked: 1117 times

Re: POLL Would you like to see these additional investing boards?

#163109

Postby IanTHughes » August 30th, 2018, 10:15 am

Lootman wrote:
Gengulphus wrote:I suspect that most Share Ideas readers aren't really all that interested in discussing P/BV - they'll probably have made their minds up about its value or otherwise years ago!

I.e. I think that the post was very largely off-topic for Share Ideas

It depends. If you see FA as some kind of world of its own, then you might feel that way. But in practice FA is often just one of several ways of assessing a share. And in that case the "Share Ideas" board is the right board because if you are discussing FA then you are probably applying that methodology to a particular share. You've suggested that readers don't want to see that discussion on Share Ideas but I for one would like that.


I always thought that Fundamental Analysis was a method that assumed that the Market sometimes mispriced a security such that a gain could be achieved before the market would correct itself. That is what I would call "Value Investing" and will of course involve a good deal of balance sheet investigation including the use of various ratios

Technical Analysis, on the other hand, assumes that everything is already reflected in the price and what an investor must look for in order to have an edge is the Market Trends. To see a trend forming and act on it before others. This, as I understand it, is much more to do with analyzing price and other charts and graphs, rather than the Balance Sheet

So, a separate TA Board would make sense to me but FA would I believe be covered by a "Value Investing" board and may be is already covered by the "Share Ideas". Although, I think that should be properly labeled as "Value Investing"

Just my twopenneth


Ian

TheMotorcycleBoy
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3245
Joined: March 7th, 2018, 8:14 pm
Has thanked: 2222 times
Been thanked: 587 times

Re: POLL Would you like to see these additional investing boards?

#163116

Postby TheMotorcycleBoy » August 30th, 2018, 10:26 am

IanTHughes wrote:So, a separate TA Board would make sense to me but FA would I believe be covered by a "Value Investing" board and may be is already covered by the "Share Ideas". Although, I think that should be properly labeled as "Value Investing"

But then there'd be confusion between that and "Value shares", I guess....where as the type of stuff I was referring to in

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=13230

was, well go ahead and read it! :)

more about ratios, balance sheets, regardless of whether the company actually represent a value share and so on.

Matt


Return to “Room 102 - Site Issues, Complaints & General Chat”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests