Lootman wrote: there would be further improvements based on its adoption by experienced and knowledgeable investors here?
I must have missed that particular post
Ian
Thanks to GrahamPlatt,gpadsa,Steffers0,lansdown,Wasron, for Donating to support the site
Lootman wrote: there would be further improvements based on its adoption by experienced and knowledgeable investors here?
CryptoPlankton wrote:Good grief, talk about a stuck record! So PYAD made some dosh by formalising and marketing a simple method of dividend investing. Maybe it wasn't a particularly groundbreaking new idea. So what? He saw an opportunity and took it - good luck to him. In the process, he has introduced the idea to many people who have either followed his method or adapted it however they see fit - and all of us here are quite capable of deciding how much credit to give him (or not) with regard to our own investments. I can see how some people may feel a little resentful, but this relentless and repetitive criticism has become more than a little tiresome...
mickeypops wrote:Just posting to say as an ex-HYPer and ex- TDL subscriber, I think the topic may have lost some focus once Luniversal’s vast volume of research and reporting ceased.
Harsh. pyad has his core philosophy, which he is free to advocate. He is also free to point out that this forum is misleading in the sense that all the irrelevant drivel that is often posted is somewhat in conflict with his original keep-it-simple ideas.Lootman wrote:pyad wrote:What I'm saying is that the sort of HYP that a newcomer might see described here is the image projected by a small minority because they are the vociferous ones.
The flaw at the heart of that statement is evident. Since HYP has no material public life outside of TLF (and before that, TMF) it is highly unlikely that there would be any "newcomer" to HYP who discovered it via any other route. So like it or not, this is is main public forum for discussing and growing the strategy. So what we say here defines it more than any other consensual body or forum, and certainly more than any one individual.
This is not the first time that you have suggested that there is a vast universe "out there" of silent HYP adherents. Obviously they cannot be known if they do not speak, and this is the place for them to speak. So you are safe in claiming that this vast constituency exists and are all loyal to some other version of HYP, because by definition that cannot ever be either verified nor disproved.
You may not like it very much, but this location is now the mantle and vanguard of HYP thinking, taking it forward, improving and progressing it. You had a useful and possibly pivotal role at one point, but now you seem to take it personally every time someone else has a good idea about it. I don't think that ego should get in the way of discovery, nor should rigidity transplant the flexibility to learn and improve.
HYP is not a fixed proprietary product. It is an approach that continually evolves, else it dies.
csearle wrote:
Where I agree with you is that this board is being allowed to evolve. Personally I find this irritating and will cease "using" the board for my minimal HYP maintenance and just help moderate it in a more disinterested way.
Regards,
Chris
EssDeeAitch wrote:As the OP and a new HYP investor, I am quite surprised (understatement) at the amount of discord apparent in many responses. It is sometimes like watching two bald men fight over possesion of a comb.
I heard of HYP on this forum, and feel that whilst HYP, as any other "system" should evolve to suit the owners needs and psychology, ie the inclusion of IT's or smaller cap stocks, due recognition is owed to pyad for his philosophy and clear, concise methodology. There is room for both "churches" in this investment universe and niether one nor the others should be critisised IMHO.
And again, genuine thanks to all respondents for opinions as we learn most when we compare differing aspects of the situation.
csearle wrote:Where I agree with you is that this board is being allowed to evolve. Personally I find this irritating and will cease "using" the board for my minimal HYP maintenance and just help moderate it in a more disinterested way.
Regards,
Chris
Arborbridge wrote:csearle wrote:Where I agree with you is that this board is being allowed to evolve. Personally I find this irritating and will cease "using" the board for my minimal HYP maintenance and just help moderate it in a more disinterested way.
Regards,
Chris
Personally I find this irritating
Well said, so do I. Some seem constantly to push an attempt to blur the lines between what is HYP and what isn't. This isn't something to applaud; quite the opposite.
Arb.
MDW1954 wrote:I suspect that this isn't the only source of irritation. The abundant wealth of minutiae is another departure from HYP-Practical on TMF that I regret.
It is difficult (in fact impossible) to raise this without running the risk of singling out a small subset of readers, but do we need quite so many posts pointing out the results of a specific drug test, contract win, or re-publishing a news item that is in the public domain?
Put another way, would Doris care? Or even notice? And surely this was what Pyad was alluding to a few days back, as well. Does it really matter? And if not, why are we wasting our collective time posting and reading it?
MDW1954
tjh290633 wrote:MDW1954 wrote:I suspect that this isn't the only source of irritation. The abundant wealth of minutiae is another departure from HYP-Practical on TMF that I regret.
It is difficult (in fact impossible) to raise this without running the risk of singling out a small subset of readers, but do we need quite so many posts pointing out the results of a specific drug test, contract win, or re-publishing a news item that is in the public domain?
Put another way, would Doris care? Or even notice? And surely this was what Pyad was alluding to a few days back, as well. Does it really matter? And if not, why are we wasting our collective time posting and reading it?
MDW1954
In my case I have already read most of the relevant RNS posts, or ignored them as being of no interest, from the horse's mouth. Dividend declarations are a different matter, as are corporate actions.
TJH
idpickering wrote:tjh290633 wrote:MDW1954 wrote:I suspect that this isn't the only source of irritation. The abundant wealth of minutiae is another departure from HYP-Practical on TMF that I regret.
It is difficult (in fact impossible) to raise this without running the risk of singling out a small subset of readers, but do we need quite so many posts pointing out the results of a specific drug test, contract win, or re-publishing a news item that is in the public domain?
Put another way, would Doris care? Or even notice? And surely this was what Pyad was alluding to a few days back, as well. Does it really matter? And if not, why are we wasting our collective time posting and reading it?
MDW1954
In my case I have already read most of the relevant RNS posts, or ignored them as being of no interest, from the horse's mouth. Dividend declarations are a different matter, as are corporate actions.
TJH
I gather MDW1954 was referring to me posting details regarding drug tests from what I guess are shares that are widely held here (AZN & GSK). I think they are of interest, if you think not you can do as Terry does, and just ignore them. Or am I wasting my time trying to generate chat on this board, I'm seriously beginning to wonder?
Ian.
idpickering wrote:tjh290633 wrote:MDW1954 wrote:I suspect that this isn't the only source of irritation. The abundant wealth of minutiae is another departure from HYP-Practical on TMF that I regret.
It is difficult (in fact impossible) to raise this without running the risk of singling out a small subset of readers, but do we need quite so many posts pointing out the results of a specific drug test, contract win, or re-publishing a news item that is in the public domain?
Put another way, would Doris care? Or even notice? And surely this was what Pyad was alluding to a few days back, as well. Does it really matter? And if not, why are we wasting our collective time posting and reading it?
MDW1954
In my case I have already read most of the relevant RNS posts, or ignored them as being of no interest, from the horse's mouth. Dividend declarations are a different matter, as are corporate actions.
TJH
I gather MDW1954 was referring to me posting details regarding drug tests from what I guess are shares that are widely held here (AZN & GSK). I think they are of interest, if you think not you can do as Terry does, and just ignore them. Or am I wasting my time trying to generate chat on this board, I'm seriously beginning to wonder?
Ian.
idpickering wrote:I gather MDW1954 was referring to me posting details regarding drug tests from what I guess are shares that are widely held here (AZN & GSK). I think they are of interest, if you think not you can do as Terry does, and just ignore them. Or am I wasting my time trying to generate chat on this board, I'm seriously beginning to wonder?
Wizard wrote:PYAD is in a better place than most to know if there is a large majority of HYPers that don't not post here but happily "do dick" with their HYP, one data point he has that we do not is what the subscription number are and have been for The Dividend Letter. As I said above, my guess is that the regualrly active participants on this board number no more than 25. At the point the decision was made to discontinue The Dividend Letter, how many subscribers did it have? What was the peak level of subscripton to The Dividend Letter?
If PYAD were willing to share these figures it would give further insight in to the basis for his comments about the silent majority.
Almost all of it is not HYPish though. It is almost entirely irrelevant to HYP. It is the haystack hiding the needle. You almost do have to read it in order to rule it out. It would be better to post it elsewhere so those trying to use the board for its intended purpose don't have to wade through reams of guff about company trivia in order to find the vaguely HYP-relevant information.88V8 wrote:No, you're kindly gathering together HYPish stuff which may be of interest.
One does not have to read it.
Walrus wrote:So you guys are now advocating removing actual news that relate to HYP shares off the board.
Return to “HYP Practical (See Group Guidelines)”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest