Lack of financial discussion lately?

[SalvorHardin]

It's not quite as fleeting as you make out. TMF UK more-or-less thrived for around 18 years, probably a little longer than Usenet's heyday. TLF filled the gap when it was abruptly removed, and while it probably didn't manage to get a majority of the TMF subscribers, in itself it has been a success I think (and continues to be so).

Agreed. I spend quite a bit of time on the original American Motley Fool (fool.com), which uses the same message board layout as TMF did, and judging from the amount of posting that goes on there web-based forums have not had their day. The Berkshire Hathaway forum routinely gets more than 100 posts on a typical day. America does however have a much stronger private investor culture than the UK and roughly five times the population, which means more posters.

The thought of spending time on a social media forum that's dominated by people who buy fractional shares on Robinhood and talk about Bitcoin all day fills me with dread. I remember the dotcom boom, and subsequent collapse, and see a lot of parallels with what happened then and what is happening now.

Fortunately I don't need, or even feel the need, to chase the latest trends. I'm more concerned with preserving the real value of what I have, rather than taking on more risk for larger potential gains. My main concession to this is a small holding in Moderna, a biotechnology company which I have great difficulty in valuing, which I justify holding purely on the grounds that its mRNA technology seems to have a lot of applications beyond its coronavirus vaccine. And if its share price collapses it will have no significant effect upon my finances.

Incidentally if anyone wants a bullish signal about the American economy, Union Pacific railroad published its 2020 results earlier in the week. In the final three months of 2020 its total "revenue carloads" of freight were 3% higher than in 2019. Given all that has happened in 2020, this a positive sign for the American economy IMHO.

https://www.up.com/media/releases/210121-4q-earnings.htm

[AsleepInYorkshire]

Techically the ability to see a list of subjects upon which there have been recent posts is a good thing. I vary as to how much spare time I have and without that sort of facility would be unlikely to participate in a forum.

That's a good point. I look at the Lemon Lounge postings first, then the Investors Forum, Then I proceed to unread posts and look at any which might be of interest. 90% are not, as far as I am concerned, but I can pick up anything of interest.

TJH

By extension, I am completely oblivious which sub-forum I am posting in. I only ever click the "new posts" link and view what catches my eye from there. Otherwise, I respond to notifications. I have no idea post by post which sub forum I post into, it's not often I start a new thread.

RVF

That's exactly how I use the site site. Could it be that some haven't seen the little button for new posts? It did take me a time to find it

AiY

[swill453]

That's exactly how I use the site site. Could it be that some haven't seen the little button for new posts? It did take me a time to find it

I read the site by subscribing to the forums I'm interested in, then work exclusively from the Notifications dropdown.

(OK I occasionally look at New Posts if I'm bored and looking for something to read.)

Scott.

[johnhemming]

Could it be that some haven't seen the little button for new posts?

I have bookmarked the link that comes up which avoids the need to find the button. Then I respond to notifications. If I am busy then I only respond to notifications.

[Lootman]

Not sure that the TMF banking board was the most "dynamic" there,

It depends what you mean by dynamic. I am not sure any other board coordinated the issuing of litigation against a bank.

Yes, well not every Fool agreed with that. Some of us thought that those vulture speculators should have taken their losses on the chin given that they made risky bets on junk preference shares. But further discussion would probably lead us off topic here.

Apparently the oil/gas TMF board had a lot of interest and lively debate, and much money was made there by some, although it was not one I frequented much.

[mc2fool]

By extension, I am completely oblivious which sub-forum I am posting in. I only ever click the "new posts" link and view what catches my eye from there. Otherwise, I respond to notifications. I have no idea post by post which sub forum I post into, it's not often I start a new thread.

RVF

That's exactly how I use the site site. Could it be that some haven't seen the little button for new posts? It did take me a time to find it

AiY

Just be aware that New posts doesn't always show you all new posts, the list seems to get purged regularly. So if you are interested in seeing and keeping up with all new posts in a forum, say the Biscuit Bar, then you should go to that forum and see which topics have a red icon.

There was a discussion about this a couple of years ago. Rather that diverting this thread I suggest folks that want to know more read up there. viewtopic.php?f=21&t=14935

[GrahamPlatt]

Oh the irony! Here you all are bemoaning the lack of financial discussion, meanwhile a perfectly valid post disappears over the hill (well, drops of the new posts list) without comment. viewtopic.php?f=33&t=27452&p=379690&hilit=RMS#p379690

[csearle]

By the time TMF closed its boards that younger community had gone.

Look, young Clariman, I'm doing my bit! I've recruited 33.33333% of my offspring to this site and I think, if I'm not mistaken, that 66.66667% of them have stuck their noses in.

Chris

[XFool]

The thing with TMF was that it was ultimately trying to cash in on its "advice". It did this by enticing eyeballs with the personal finance aspect and then hoped to sell investment products and services to those same people. When TMF started losing the personal finance crowd that business model started to fail. The TMF forums were there to generate revenue and, when they ceased to do that, they were canned. But that is not a factor for TLF I would have thought.

Interesting. My impression of TMF UK when it started was that of a semi-amateur or enthusiasts site, prompted by the original US TMF. It only seemed to become professionalised as a business later on. But this may simply be my naive pov and it could have always been planned as a business trajectory. The US version of TMF manages to survive in essentially the same form to this day, though I get the impression the BBs are wilting.

Grumpy old codgers need a place too.

Absolutely.

[XFool]

For me, TLF might just as well be one thing without sub forums. I likely developed that habit at Facebook where all my interests are on one page in front of me. Facebook for me (and millions of others) has replaced dozens of stand alone forums.

RVF

I have always, and still do, find Facebook I.N.C.O.M.P.R.E.H.E.N.S.I.B.L.E

[88V8]

Could it be that some haven't seen the little button for new posts? It did take me a time to find it

I never use that.
I only look at the boards that interest me, it's easy enough to skip through. I spend more than enough time online already without adding to it.

V8

[Lootman]

The thing with TMF was that it was ultimately trying to cash in on its "advice". It did this by enticing eyeballs with the personal finance aspect and then hoped to sell investment products and services to those same people. When TMF started losing the personal finance crowd that business model started to fail. The TMF forums were there to generate revenue and, when they ceased to do that, they were canned. But that is not a factor for TLF I would have thought.

Interesting. My impression of TMF UK when it started was that of a semi-amateur or enthusiasts site, prompted by the original US TMF. It only seemed to become professionalised as a business later on. But this may simply be my naive pov and it could have always been planned as a business trajectory. The US version of TMF manages to survive in essentially the same form to this day, though I get the impression the BBs are wilting.

I think that is broadly correct. I recall its very early days in the US where it advocated index funds heavily as the best vehicle for most investors. Common advice now but back then (25 years ago now) it was still fairly radical, not least because nobody really makes money out of telling others to buy index funds. TMF US had a low key, folksy and whimsical charm to it.

As TMF US grew it needed more funds to keep the venture going, and then came the products and services for sale, whereupon TMF realised that you can only make money by encouraging a more active approach to investment, which led to subscription-type services such as tipsheets. Passive investing took a back seat as a result.

With TMF UK I was thinking more about the period from 2010 and on, by which time it had also become more commercial and profit-orientated. Some of what I said was inference, but I did have some lively discussions with TMF staff in those years about their approach to the boards and, in particular, the personal finance and advice boards, which led to my adoption of those views.

TMF US has the critical mass to continue in a sense that I think TMF UK never really had. That said I do not look at it much these days, and do not use their boards despite the fact that I have a lively interest in US investing.

[csearle]

Indeed, that's why I think lots of sub-forums are pretty much a waste of time these days for a lot of us who simply don't look or care where the post lies in the long list of sub forums.

The danger is of course that by being oblivious to where you are posting might run the risk of you ignoring the bylaws of the place you are posting. So you should also anticipate your posts being summarily deleted, as ignorance is not a valid defence given that each board's guidance is published.

Chris

[csearle]

Of course, I may accidentally post in someone's walled garden. But that's a by product of such a thing existing in the first place.

Some of my dearest friends are anarchists.

Chris

[AsleepInYorkshire]

Of course, I may accidentally post in someone's walled garden. But that's a by product of such a thing existing in the first place.

Some of my dearest friends are anarchists.

Chris

I have no friends

Except Dobby of course

AiY

[dealtn]

Could it be that some haven't seen the little button for new posts?

I have bookmarked the link that comes up which avoids the need to find the button. Then I respond to notifications. If I am busy then I only respond to notifications.

Indeed, that's why I think lots of sub-forums are pretty much a waste of time these days for a lot of us who simply don't look or care where the post lies in the long list of sub forums.

RVF

Which "pretty much" annoys hugely those of us that do care where posts are made!

[Mike4]

Indeed, that's why I think lots of sub-forums are pretty much a waste of time these days for a lot of us who simply don't look or care where the post lies in the long list of sub forums.

The danger is of course that by being oblivious to where you are posting might run the risk of you ignoring the bylaws of the place you are posting. So you should also anticipate your posts being summarily deleted, as ignorance is not a valid defence given that each boards's guidance is published.

Chris

That's correct. And as I am seldom anything other than constructive and polite I don't see it is a particular issue. Of course, I may accidentally post in someone's walled garden. But that's a by product of such a thing existing in the first place. It may be a minority opinion, but I can't really see any value in having different sub-forums any more. Thanks.

RVF

I find this view incomprehensible.

If all the subforums were abolished and all posts lumped into one massive never-ending thread, this site would be indistinguishable from FaceBook.

The way Facebook does this is the whole reason I hate the place and don't use it.

[1nvest]

I think that is broadly correct. I recall its very early days in the US where it advocated index funds heavily as the best vehicle for most investors. Common advice now but back then (25 years ago now) it was still fairly radical, not least because nobody really makes money out of telling others to buy index funds.

Index fund providers/managers and many others make money out of Index funds. If you held individual stocks in a foreign country often dividend withholding taxes will be applied, in some cases 30% or more. Investment Trusts might see north of a 1% annual take, and often you'll pay a premium to the shares held of maybe 10% or more. Platform fees, fund managers fees, taxes ...etc. can all collectively mount up. Yes some costs have come right down, in postal days both the market maker and broker could levy massive spreads/costs, often north of 10% market-maker spreads and £100 broker fee (even today in some cases such wide mm spreads are still evident).

In some cases, such a as decade of 0% real overall mathematical outcome, after costs and perhaps withdrawals (drawdown) portfolios can be devastated.

John (Jack) Bogle's ultimate portfolio was to simply buy a diverse bunch of stocks initially in around equal measure, and just hold. But Vanguard decided that that wasn't a product it could viably market.

Index providers (beneficiaries) have done a remarkable job at convincing investors that their way is in their best interests. Pre popularity of Index Funds and it was common for investors to follow Bogle's approach, often less than 10 diverse stocks being held by each investor, bought and held. Since the 1980's that's transitioned over to many high rise expensive offices in prime locations, high salaries, lavish lifestyle beneficiaries out of 'other peoples money'. Much of which is sourced out of easier and way more frequent trading.

Consider a global index fund, that holds over a thousand different stocks across perhaps 200 countries, that perhaps collectively sees a 3% dividend yield and a average 20% dividend withholding tax. 0.6% combined cost. Index calculators along with Index fund providers have broadly opted to bury such detail away, such that the reported index return is net of that cost. A low cost fund might levy a 0.2% fund management fee, lifting the cost to the investor to 0.8%. Add on platform fees and that perhaps rises to 1% or more. Deduct dividend and capital gains taxation and other elements and it may be up at 2% or more. Assuming a 4% average real (after inflation) mathematical reward, and actual rewards might see half of that having been lost to others.

Another factor to consider is that Index funds have evolved. Are survivorship based. And where those 'best' cases are often suggested as being a indicator of 'average' historic rewards, but with the enforced disclaimer that they shouldn't be considered as a guide to future outcome. Dow and Jones for instance devised three main Indexes - of which just one remains as the predominant most commonly referenced.

Pyad popularised the alternative to Index funds - the original no-tinker HYP, yet despite its buy and hold nature has surprisingly high levels of board postings (albeit more towards tinkered versions).

IIRC Bogle commissioned as long term historic study of pure buy and hold of 50 stocks initial equal weighting bought and held compared to rebalancing and observed that the two came out at near 50/50 success rates, but where when the non-rebalanced won it averaged a relatively high margin, but when rebalanced won it averaged a relatively low margin. But averages are irrelevant to individuals, some of which might see their own particular case out at one or the other extremes. That equally applies to index investors, where actual start and end dates can see massive deviations in outcomes. Averaging both in (saving whilst working), and out (drawdown over time during retirement) helps to average out the actual outcome.

[dave559]

TLF was not set up for the "older established crowd" but that may be the community who came this way. The truth is that TMF had already lost the general personal finance community to more vibrant forums like moneysavingexpert where Martin Lewis's TV profile drew many people. By the time TMF closed its boards that younger community had gone. My greatest personal disappointment about TLF is that we haven't drawn much of that crowd back, so this site has mostly become an Investors' site rather than a broader Personal Finance site. Most people who have significant cash to invest are older so that is maybe reflected in what you see.

Half the problem that any website has is that first of all potential members need to know that it even exists. I only relatively recently found out about TLF: it may have been via a mention on an MSE forum thread, or perhaps from there to Monevator and then from there to here, but otherwise I just wouldn't have known about it.

MSE is a great website (with an enormous reach) and a useful forum, but as it doesn't really deal with investing, we are very lucky that TLF does fill that niche. However, it is perhaps very much a niche: it is only in the past few years myself that I have had a sufficient salary to be able to start investing (and previously I was also very worried at the potential for losses, when it is perhaps more the case that you need to choose your risk level carefully, and that over the longer term you are (fingers crossed) much more likely to have made gains overall, even if there may have been some downs and ups along the way).

Another thing for older members of the forum to perhaps consider is that for the segment of the population aged from late-40s or younger, there has been the burden of ever-increasing student loans, quite possibly not enough well paying jobs to go around, and also massively increasing housing price and even rental costs, meaning that possibly a much smaller proportion of the younger population actually has the means to be able to start investing (or save for a home deposit) nowadays? Those of you who were lucky enough not to have had to deal with those issues (and I am aware of the difficulties of the interest rate issues of the 70s and 80s, although I understand that then at least it was easier to start, and then stay on, a professional level career, than it is nowadays?) perhaps might not be fully aware of the full range of obstacles that stand in the way of most younger people who may want to start investing, or even just saving more than a few pounds at the end of the month.

There is also perhaps the fact that many discussion groups now seem to take place on Facebook, although I have to say that I find its interface for discussions absolutely awful: virtually impossible to find existing discussion threads again, and just generally awkward to use. Proper forum software, such as TLF uses, does make for a more usable interface, although perhaps not quite as easy to use from mobiles, which may also be a factor for those who are used to doing (almost) everything from their phones?

[dave559]

I have bookmarked the link that comes up which avoids the need to find the button. Then I respond to notifications. If I am busy then I only respond to notifications.

Indeed, that's why I think lots of sub-forums are pretty much a waste of time these days for a lot of us who simply don't look or care where the post lies in the long list of sub forums.

When reading, the "new posts" list is very useful (and it's what I use almost all of the time).

But having some sort of ordered hierarchy of sub-forums is also useful: even the list of new posts shows which forum each post has been posted in, which can be a great help in working out the "context" of a thread, before you even (decide to) open it (or not), and it's also a further clue on the occasions when someone hasn't given a particularly helpful subject for their post, so it is useful when writing a new post thread as well.

Also, currently being entirely a fund investor myself, it means that I can (probably) ignore new posts listed as being in "HYP" forums, as those are unlikely to be of interest to me. And vice versa, etc.