Buy and hold? Not for me. - Page 2
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 35

Thread: Buy and hold? Not for me.

  1. #11
    Senior Member My Own Advisor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Ottawa
    Posts
    4,869
    A key question to ask: what are the dividend growth histories of these companies?

    That's key to your answer of whether buying and holding these companies was a good decision.

    Hidden Content - Working on a $1 million portfolio and $30k per year from it.

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    1,400
    How many times have we talked about holding Fortis here since 2009 or before. It hasn't gone up a lot like of other stocks but it has been solid and has a solid dividend. No one knew how far the central banks would go to prop everything up but Fortis seemed like a solid company that could stand up on its own.

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    533
    Long term buy & hold would have a bad track record as stocks eventually go to zero

  4. Remove Advertisements
    CanadianMoneyForum.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    210
    Two and a half years isn't buy and hold. The only product you would buy for that short time would be cash.

    ltr

  6. #15
    Senior Member Beaver101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,947
    Quote Originally Posted by like_to_retire View Post
    Two and a half years isn't buy and hold. The only product you would buy for that short time would be cash.

    ltr
    ...+1 and besides it was set up as a paper "trading" account so why the B&H and with these growth types of stocks? Maybe this is a joke thread like Eder said since R-O'Toole seems to be savvy investor.
    Everyone should be respected as an individual, but no one idolized.-A. Einstein

  7. #16
    Senior Member Beaver101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,947
    PS: I think B&H still works - at least for me ... bought little sweety RSI and still holding ... maybe forever or until bought out.
    Everyone should be respected as an individual, but no one idolized.-A. Einstein

  8. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Ont.
    Posts
    1,025
    I b&h and also buy and flip a small %. Those paper stock exercises have a short time horizon so of no real interest to me.

  9. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    144
    Hi:

    What material makes the best beam?

    Is it a steel I beam with it's best mechanical properties including same strength in all directions that is isotropic? It is stable with temperature and humidity changes. Has to be ordered cut to length, otherwise one needs a torch on site. Costly though.

    Or maybe used railway rails? Cheap as they are pulled out of service all over the place. Steel, so isotropic. An approximate I shape, so a bit efficient? But not in the building code, so you would need an engineer to run the calculations for the building inspector.

    Or just plain tree trunks with two flats sawed on a band saw, local and cheap, but heavy? Very unstable with temperature and humidity changes.

    Or 2x10 or 2x12s, regular sawed and graded lumber, as many in parallel as needed? Lighter than brute force tree trunks, but not local.

    Too bad one can't use oriented strand board, makes use of a waste material and approximates isotropic with all the little pieces glued in random orientations. Plus much reduced temperature and humidity issues.

    Consider an engineered wood I beam with OSB web and solid wood top and bottom. It has the efficient shape of a steel I beam. The web is approximately isotropic even though the top and bottoms are not, it does not matter so much there. It is workable on site with a chain saw. It is more mechanically stable with humidity changes. Does not cost much more than sawed lumber. It really is parts of all the other possibilities.

    People are always looking to "prove" why what they do is best and other techniques are inferior. I look at the various investing ideas and methodologies as theoretical models that don't necessarily exist in reality, but still present useful ideas to apply.

    Buy and hold? Nobody has ever on one day purchased a single portfolio and come back 50 years later to see how they did. But the idea of trying to hold the same things over decades with little attention is useful. Needs less ongoing reading and research vs always hunting for new opportunities. Not zero attention, as I am always happy to add more on the cheap, and sell some back when the chance comes by.

    Dividends? Sure, why not. Provides some corporate discipline over no dividends. I get some cash coming in that I can choose between consumption, reinvesting in the same company, or investing elsewhere. Nice tax treatment, especially for someone with zero employment income.

    Dividend growth? Surely growing dividends is a good thing.

    Materials stocks? Over the cycle can be painful, but if I can get me some cheap in a good panic, why not? Nobody says I have to hold through the cycle, or have to hold all I ever purchased.

    Financials and utilities, so called "safe"? Sure, they provide long term relative stability and pretty good returns to boot.

    I most of the time invest in certain ways with certain stocks, but I am not dogmatic about it. I like to think that I try to observe the truth of the investing landscape and adapt to it. So depending on circumstances I jump on one or another of the ideas above, and others, to a higher degree than the static situation.

    All investing models above and others not mentioned have their place in the tool kit. Different situations work better with different tools.

    hboy54

  10. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    7,811
    Quote Originally Posted by Rusty O'Toole View Post
    ... Buy and hold may work if you buy the 1 stock that goes up forever ...
    Not sure anything goes up forever ... though I seem to be well over the "1 stock" mark.


    But then again, some stocks were held for a few months, some a few years and a few for decades so I try to fit the approach to the stock/company business.


    Cheers

  11. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,636
    Quote Originally Posted by Beaver101 View Post
    ...+1 and besides it was set up as a paper "trading" account so why the B&H and with these growth types of stocks? Maybe this is a joke thread like Eder said since R-O'Toole seems to be savvy investor.
    Thank you for the nice compliment. If I am a savvy investor it is because I keep learning, and try to find a style of investing that suits my personality. When I pulled up this old account it hilited a couple of things for me, one is how much I have learned in the last 2 1/2 years and another is how I don't like holding a stock that is going down.

    I agree that buy and hold works better in real estate. Every property I ever sold ended up going up a lot, usually right after I sold it. Not so much with stocks.

    I posted it because I thought it was interesting food for thought, and might spark some intelligent comments on the pros and cons of different investing styles.


Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •