# How is it possible that Derek Foster retired at 34?



## redseal (Oct 31, 2011)

According to the little bit of reading Ive done, one would need to have a total portfolio of over 1 million dollars in order to live off of a steady stream of dividends at about 4 or 5 % (which of course would only be 40-50k a year, I personally would consider this a bare minimum to survive on).

Seems pretty cut and dry to me.. so, how in the hell did he manage to invest 1mil before 34?! He claims to be an average joe... I must be missing something here.


----------



## donald (Apr 18, 2011)

The million got him in the door...he ain't know average joe anymore...book sales!...atleast that is what I gather...book sales equal $$


----------



## Daniel A. (Mar 20, 2011)

If one is doing something to make income I don't call that retired.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

He didn't have a million. I read somewhere his portfolio when he first rented was less than half of that.

I have read some interviews and articles and he lived on very low income under $30k a year, and because of his low income qualified for many government subsidies.

Generally based on everything I've read he is a farce. He didn't even follow his own advice which he told his first book on during the downturn.


----------



## Jungle (Feb 17, 2010)

He made a lot of money leverging PM. (Phillip Morris) He had a 200-400K portfolio paying dividends. Home mortgage was paid. He also had a rental property paid off too in Ottawa. He was frugal, never owned a cell phone, made calls from a pay phone, etc.

Then he started selling books and doing paid speaches. I think he is over 40 now. 

Like other's said, the worst part was when he sold all his stocks during the downturn of 09, making a big mistake as the markets returned.


----------



## Jungle (Feb 17, 2010)

Deciding how much pay you need to retire is subjective on your spending and lifestyle. 

Once your mortgage (or debts) are paid, 40-50K in dividends is a lot of money. I would not find it hard to retire with 30K of take home income and a paid off house. But this number is always subjective to your lifestyle, wants and needs.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

He isn't retired.... that was his trick. He's a bit of a charlatan in my opinion.


----------



## crazyjackcsa (Aug 8, 2010)

Sweet, two readseal threads back to back! Asking questions easily searched!


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

Here we go again on Derek Foster and his shenanigans.
Search this forum for several threads on this topic.
His so-called retirement has been discussed ad nauseam on other forums too such as the old Money Sense and FWR.

Do a few google searches, etc.

In brief (IMHO):
- He is not retired. Not is, not was. Never was.
- He did quit his full time job, but it was not investment income that sustained his "retirement" - the book sales, the speeches, and the family income did
- A lot of his strategy was based on the high yield unit trusts. That is what generated the 10% or so monthly cash flow. That scheme fell apart in 2009.

Anyhow, long story short, before you buy into some such magical hype, do your research into the person, his strategy, and what he is really selling.


----------



## Sherlock (Apr 18, 2010)

Isn't it great that our tax dollars are being used to support a guy who could still work but chooses not to?


----------



## Dmoney (Apr 28, 2011)

Sherlock said:


> Isn't it great that our tax dollars are being used to support a guy who could still work but chooses not to?


Isn't it great that our tax dollars are being used to support thousands of guys who could still work but choose not to? But that's a whole other can of worms.


----------



## ddkay (Nov 20, 2010)

Wonder when we'll lose our AAA rating


----------



## Sherlock (Apr 18, 2010)

Dmoney said:


> Isn't it great that our tax dollars are being used to support thousands of guys who could still work but choose not to? But that's a whole other can of worms.


So just because other guys do it it's ok?


----------



## lost in space (Aug 31, 2015)

I’m updating this old thread as an email from Derek Foster arrived today (on his mailing list) and I agreed with his comment that the TSX is really cheap and we should consider buying. I read his book Stop Working when it first came out and remember the flame wars it ignited. To me everyone got hung up on the fact he collected government money and nobody commented on the fact his math didn’t make sense. Short version is he’s really a Jacob -- of ERE but he never mentions that in the book, my impression is all his books and video series are about long term buy and hold. In other words is you start in you 20s and invest by your early 50s you’ll be ready for a very comfortable retirement. I don’t need to spend a $120 for that when you can get all that for free here. His second series Minimum Wage Millionaire is probably closer his real ERE story. That is of more interest to me.
Anyways has anyone (or better is anyone will to admit) read his books or watched his video series?


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

I have read all of his books. He has a particular focus on balancing both US and Cdn dividend stocks. It has really, really paid off for him in the last 5 years - he always had some but it seems like was buying more US stocks than normal in 2009-2012 especially when the dollar was high. Not all at once I don't think, just a slow process over a number of years. I don't think it was his plan for the Cdn dollar to drop, he just recognized decent value for great companies. Now it seems like he is starting to look at Canada again in places. With the dollar below 80 cents, I think it makes sense to slowly accumulate Canadian assets. His approach is really quite simple but it has definitely worked for him.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

Dmoney said:


> Isn't it great that our tax dollars are being used to support thousands of guys who could still work but choose not to? But that's a whole other can of worms.



Did you ever maybe think the way we have structured work is the problem? If it wasnt a soul sucking oppressive environment, maybe people would like to do it instead of have to do it.


----------



## Barbara100 (Feb 20, 2016)

He is not retired he is still in business and making dolors.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

tygrus said:


> Did you ever maybe think the way we have structured work is the problem? If it wasnt a soul sucking oppressive environment, maybe people would like to do it instead of have to do it.


How many think that their choices and approaches have contributed to or locked them into the soul sucking oppressive environment?

A quick wander through the CMF early retirement thread shows lots of "anything but my view is nuts" thinking.


Cheers


----------



## peterk (May 16, 2010)

^^ I don't think people retiring extra early in their 30s or 40s with very modest investment portfolios, taking advantage of low tax rates and a few minor government credits, is a problem. Not an economic nor a moral problem.

How come it is that as soon someone shows an inkling of intelligence and responsible character, that society all of a sudden holds that individual to a much higher level of responsibly and an expectation to "suffer for the good of others", "do the right thing" and "not take advantage", working their *** off in a "soul sucking oppressive environment" as you put it.

But if you start off your adult life as a degenerate leech with no ambition or brains then society seem to be willing to bend over backwards to accept any excuse for your poor behavior and circumstance, providing for you indefinitely (with other people's money, of course) without complaint or any expectation that you ever take responsibility for your own life.

I don't know anything about this Derek guy, never hear of him. From reading this thread though it sounds like he found success by means of working smart, hustling, and good old fashioned luck. Kind of a Mr. Money Mustache meets The Wealthy Barber meets Shamwow Guy, thing.


----------



## donald (Apr 18, 2011)

Was he married and or had kids by 34?
Seems like he wasn't huh?
drink kool-aid or do what other people don't do
I would be surprised if he followed the 'script' 
did he?


----------



## steve41 (Apr 18, 2009)

I remember reading Jeremy Rifkin's "End of Work" in the 90s. It doesn't seem to have caught on though.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

I think a lot of people have issues with Derek because of his claim to have "stopped working". By his definition, he hasn't had a job since his 30's, but he sells books, a video series, writes for magazines, does public appearances, etc. On top of his investing...so people got up in arms.

True, he doesn't make money solely off investing in stocks...he invested in his "persona" as well, and that makes him a lot of money as well (something many people missed, because he doesn't promote that part). Of course, his lifestyle is probably a lot freer than 99.99% of the paycheque people out there, and probably a lot closer to the average "retirement" than most people want to admit (I know plenty of "retired" people who still work...many that need to still work). 

Personally, I don't understand how people can preach "read the wealthy barber" (where Chilton preaches cut back on spending, invest, and retire) which is completely opposite of how he made his personal fortune, but criticize Foster for only explaining a partial key to his success. Anyone with brains, or who stays up watching infomercials, could figure out where his supplemental income comes from.

Heck, many people think I'm retired, others say I work...it's a tough definition. I'd be curious as to how old others on here think I am...would my advice be better if I was nearly dead, or maybe Foster's age? There are plenty of people on this board who've said that I'm lying about properties I bought, or my system for evaluating properties and investments...as if I'd benefit from lying. Many wonder why I give "free" advice here...I'll tell you the secret. I know it doesn't matter, you'll never be my competition. 99% of people reading these forums will never actually go out and do anything. They'll just read the forum, make critisism, and continue doing what they always do. I can't imagine being in the public eye from being an author is like, especially after writing a book which bucks the stautus quo. 

It's in our natures to try to pull down those who are successful around us, it's certainly easier than trying to rise to their levels. The vultures are always circling, looking for weakness.

Would I live the way Foster says, probably not, do I believe it's possible? Most definitely. 

Of course, I'll probably be accused of being Derek Foster now...


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

I seem to remember reading about him about 5 or 6 years ago and his stated income from investments was under $50k for his household.

Doesn't seem like a lot but he lived in a rural area, had zero debt and was fairly self sufficient. Dont need a lot of money to live a decent life if you keep spending under control. Most people dont want to live that way so they are stuck in the cycle.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

I have read all Derek's books and enjoyed them. One thing he has over most investment gurus is that he has actually done what he is purporting to do. You might be surprised how rare this is. Some of his ideas are half baked but at least he has some. I would rather read a book that stimulates my thinking about investing and retiring, than listen to the critics. 

A lot of critics of Foster, and other investment ideas, practice what I call the creativity of the loser. Never think they are not creative because they can't think of any way to better themselves, and shoot down every idea you suggest. Notice that whatever idea someone comes up with, quick as a flash they can think of all the reasons it won't work. They never have a single suggestion of what they think will work but they have a million reasons something won't work. And some of the ideas they come up with are truly astonishing. I could not come up with such creative ideas. Too bad their ideas are all about staying a loser.

Now back to Foster. Let's look at his basic plan. 1) Start investing early and put some money by out of every pay, no matter how little you make 2) Invest in sound, reliable dividend paying stocks and rental real estate 3) cut your spending to the bone and you can retire when you are young enough to enjoy it.

Doesn't sound so crazy to me.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

I believe he, or someone posing as him, used to frequent this very forum, or it may have been the other one...either way it was before my time.

I heard he was run off by the membership of the time because, during the downturn, his system wasn't working or he did something different...

Either way, this board no longer has the ability to tap his ideas...even if you didn't agree with them.


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

One little tidbit that no one has mentioned so far:

He has *6 kids*. This is an important part of his strategy. He collects a pile of child and family benefits.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

I had read some of Derek's books, and they do stimulate a different way of thinking. I also have no problem with him making money from books because he could live without the income from his writings. My biggest issue is during the downtown in 2008/2009 he went and did the exact opposite startegy that he preach. He was a buy and hold, get the dive sends, don't worry about gains philosophy so don't go with the ups and downs and panic buy or sell. With the 2009 downturn, he was all over the place back tracking as he did opposite of what practice. THAT was my issue with him. He lost credibility at that point and I have followed him since.


----------



## nobleea (Oct 11, 2013)

I believe the issue many had with DF was what he was preaching for financial independence was not how he achieved it (though he did follow his words after FI). He made huge bets on call options on depressed stocks and it worked out. That provided the capital he needed to live off or retire early. But then he preached about blue chip, save, don't spend too much (a la chilton) and how if you did this, you too could retire early. But those who ran through the numbers showed that it couldn't work, and then the truth came out about his massive binary bets.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

The underlying message isnt to be a cheap skate but imo we spend way too much on junk that gives us a temporary bit of satisfaction then is gone. Whereas experiences last a life time especially the experience of never working for the man. The freedom with that is priceless and you don`t need to save a fortune to get it. I think with no debt and 750k investments it is achievable.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Plugging Along said:


> My biggest issue is during the downtown in 2008/2009 he went and did the exact opposite startegy that he preach. He was a buy and hold, get the dive sends, don't worry about gains philosophy so don't go with the ups and downs and panic buy or sell. With the 2009 downturn, he was all over the place back tracking as he did opposite of what practice. THAT was my issue with him. He lost credibility at that point and I have followed him since.


Doe this mean if you find a strategy that works, you must be married to it for life? No one is allowed to explore new systems to see if they work?

I often talk about my buy and hold real estate strategy, however since I buy significantly under market, does that mean if I were to sell out all my properties and cash in the capital gains that my original plan is garbage?

Maybe, during the downturn, he decided to try a different strategy...if it worked better, and he wrote about it, would that be okay? If he failed and returned to his original strategy, wouldn't that prove he was right originally?

Evolution isn't necessarily a bad thing. My investment strategy has changed over the years.


----------



## donald (Apr 18, 2011)

Jag i think you under-estimate the younger crowd reading cmf
Anybody under 35 reading cmf on a sat night may well indeed be creeping on you one day lol
99% of people don't true
but id say reading cmf prob has to put someone in the 2% be default lol
50-50 odds a competitor is in your mist bro


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

There are hundreds of people on this board, even 1% only means a few...I think I can handle it. Who knows, I may be one of the under 35 crowd. Either way, there are millions of places to own in Canada, I'm willing to share. In fact, I've helped several friends get their own places and started properly...probably less than 1% of those who I've talked to about it though. 

A guy I went to school with had 3 rentals in his own name before graduation from high school...I wonder how he's doing today. He's probably very well off today. Should track him down now that I'm getting nostalgic. We all thought he was weird back then.


----------



## donald (Apr 18, 2011)

Just bugging Jag
but everybody does have to start somewhere
and it usually starts by reading/studying
with the emphasis on not be 'directed' on any subject matter
uni profs don't always count lol


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

Just a Guy said:


> Doe this mean if you find a strategy that works, you must be married to it for life? No one is allowed to explore new systems to see if they work?
> 
> I often talk about my buy and hold real estate strategy, however since I buy significantly under market, does that mean if I were to sell out all my properties and cash in the capital gains that my original plan is garbage?
> 
> ...


If you wrote book preaching to every one that you shouldn't worry about downturns in the real estate, and just keep holding on because the gains are in the income not in Preserving capital, and the. You sold to preserve your capital, I would call BS... If you critesized the other strategies and then went with one of them I would say hypocrite or that you didn't have the experience to be be writing about yours as a true strategy and you got lucky.

Evolution is great. It implies that you are learning something new. Criticizing other strategies as if you already tested them and the were wrong and changing strategy is back peddling.

When you write about your real estate investments, I find it very interesting. You bring in a different view which I truly appreciate. You also are very realistic in that there are assumptions, and conditions that need to be considered, and it's not a strategy that everyone can just do. That's is so simple.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Well, to tell the truth, I often speak against flipping, I see it as being much closer to gambling in many cases. Usually it's very safe in a rising market, and deadly in a falling one.

That being said, a few years back, I bought a place which I fully intended to renovate and rent but my realtor approached me shortly after closing saying someone in the building had a friend who was interested in moving in and wanted to know if I'd be willing to sell. The offer was an immediate gain of about $50k. Could this be considered flipping?

I'm still a buy and hold landlord, but I must admit, I often look at my properties and wonder if cashing out and buying bigger with the proceeds wouldn't be a good idea. Of course, since I don't have any of my own money in, I'm not big on paying taxes, and I can't find anything bigger that is priced fairly, I haven't really been tempted. I don't see any point in sitting on a pile of cash that doesn't work for me.

To me though, passing up on a deal handed to me, even if it was a system I didn't believe in long term, would be more foolish.

I haven't tried every form of real estate or stock investing, but I've looked into a lot of them and formed opinions. That doesn't mean my opinions are correct. There are many on this board who say real estate investing doesn't work, when I've detailed my ideas, I haven seen anyone poke holes in my method, but that doesn't mean anyone can just copy me. I can't convey all my experience in short messages. That and I truly think your investing style has to match your personality. 

Perhaps if the doubters tried my method, their opinions would change. If I tried flipping, or day trading, or whatever I may be successful. Frankly I doubt it because my personality doesn't lend itself to be successful in those strategies. 

If I wrote a book, I'd expouse the strategy I believe in, the one that works for me and matches my personality. I'd probably express other methods that wouldn't work as well in my opinion, and explain why. Does that mean those methods would never work? Not at all. I know people who do well in all sorts of methods I'd never try. In my early days though, before I learned my personality, I tried all sorts of different methods...and kept coming back to what worked for me.

Maybe Derek talked to someone who was good at the new strategy and decided to try it for himself, or maybe give it a second chance. Sounds like he got burned by it. He's still young, and can still make mistakes. I've yet to meet anyone perfect, let alone someone perfect in their 40's. 

Of course, if he was still in his teens or 20's he'd never admit to making mistakes, let alone not knowing the answer to everything...remember, his first books were written in his 30's. Life has hardly begun to humble most people by then.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Just a Guy said:


> I think a lot of people have issues with Derek because of his claim to have "stopped working". By his definition, he hasn't had a job since his 30's, but he sells books, a video series, writes for magazines, does public appearances, etc. On top of his investing...so people got up in arms.
> 
> True, he doesn't make money solely off investing in stocks...he invested in his "persona" as well, and that makes him a lot of money as well (something many people missed, because he doesn't promote that part). Of course, his lifestyle is probably a lot freer than 99.99% of the paycheque people out there, and probably a lot closer to the average "retirement" than most people want to admit (I know plenty of "retired" people who still work...many that need to still work).
> 
> ...


He is retired like Adele and Oprah are retired. He's just defining various types of work as not work. You could say an electrician is retired, as long as you defined electrical installation and repair as 'not work'.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

I'd bet he spends a lot less time each day working than the majority of people. As I said, some people consider me retired, personally I know I still work, however it works out to a lot less than part time...pays more than full time and very tax efficient too.


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

Just a Guy said:


> I'd bet he spends a lot less time each day working than the majority of people. As I said, some people consider me retired, personally I know I still work, however it works out to a lot less than part time...pays more than full time and very tax efficient too.


With 6 kids, he works more than any one of us. And the pay is really lousy.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

I've got 4 kids and found, once they reach a certain age, they are quite helpful if raised properly. As for the pay, there are more rewards than money.


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

Just a Guy said:


> As for the pay, there are more rewards than money.


Of course.

My (tongue in cheek) point was, Foster would not be able to "retire" if not for the government benefits he was entitled to as a father of 6.


----------



## Synergy (Mar 18, 2013)

> How is it possible that Derek Foster retired at 34?


He may have stopped working in the traditional sense (9-5 job) but he's NOT retired IMO. I think we've already dealt with this in another thread somewhere on CMF?


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

More to the point, he is essentially running a ponzi scheme. He makes his living by telling people they can replicate his lifestyle and 'retire early'. Unfortunately, not many people can become self-help investing gurus and make a living off it. He is essentially a fraud--this is the problem I have with him. He is selling a lie to the gullible.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Well, as a buy and hold value investor...which seems very similar to what Foster preached, though may not have followed, I don't think that you couldn't make a lot of money this way, even enough to retire early if you live frugally. I believe I read at least two of his books and saw nothing wrong with the advice.

I don't personally follow him, so I don't know what his video series says, his story may have changed...but I find it ironic that people would write off a strategy they've never even tried. 

Of course, I suppose the buy GICs and put money in HISA is the epitemy of many investors, maybe e-series or an couch potato etf. Trust me, there is a lot more to investing out there.

I may talk a lot about my real estate, but that's because it's a lot more active than my buy and hold...heck, I rarely buy stuff. That being said, it's done very well.

Btw, I don't think Derek has even made "best seller" status in Canada. To get that status, you only need to sell 5000 copies, so I don't think he's living off the proceeds of his books. I've only seen articles from him in money saver magazine (which has a really small distribution) and those aren't regular, so that's not it either. I can't imagine he has hundreds of video subscribers. The government cheques, even with six kids, can't be a lot or trailer parks would be empty (yes, I know that's not PC, it's a joke)...so I'd be willing to bet he's got some knowledge of making some money. Kids are bloody expensive, government money or no.

Oh, and he's not even close to running a Ponzi scheme, maybe you need to read up on what those are...he's not investing money from others, he's giving advice which you can chose to follow or not.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Just a Guy said:


> Well, as a buy and hold value investor...which seems very similar to what Foster preached, though may not have followed, I don't think that you couldn't make a lot of money this way, even enough to retire early if you live frugally.


The way I read his comments, he was saying that living frugally was not required, dividends stocks were the smart, easy way to rake in a fortune (Nortel and other dividend payors to the contrary).

IAC, holding instead of selling/buying at the bottom worked better for me that what he commented he "had" to do. Now, he says he was trying to time the market and was an "idiot".




Just a Guy said:


> ... I don't personally follow him, so I don't know what his video series says, his story may have changed...but I find it ironic that people would write off a strategy they've never even tried.


You wouldn't have a problem with the poster on CMF who says RE is the easy way to have the same lifestyle as one has while employed?
Or that it is effortless as one just has to buy properties and let the income flow in? It wouldn't bother you to read this poster to later admit to hiring a RE management company but "trust me ... RE is easy"?

That seemed to be what he was saying in the book I read, where at minimum ... there's more work staying on top of the investments than I was reading.

The lastest round does not sound much different.


> In the press piece, entitled "With a few simple strategies, new investors can enter the market with confidence", Derek Foster is back to promoting dividend stocks as an easy-to-follow approach for inexperienced investors.
> 
> Here is an excerpt:
> Foster said the most important thing an inexperienced investor should look for is companies that pay dividends.
> ...


This does not square with what he is doing.


> These days, the 38-year-old said he deals with stock options, a more complicated form of investing that boils down to bidding to buy shares as the value drops. * Rather than being a lazy investor these days, hes spending a lot more time watching the stock market and protecting his portfolio *than he did during his early retirement.


So which is it? 
Autopilot that requires no effort/follow up or avoiding being a "lazy investor" by watching the market closer and more advanced investing like trading options to protect the portfolio?

http://www.canadianbusiness.com/blogs-and-comment/derek-foster-working-on-a-comeback/


[ Interesting to read that stock options boil down to buy shares *as the value drops*. ]




Just a Guy said:


> ... Trust me, there is a lot more to investing out there.


I am pretty sure I've seen you post that it takes some effort ... which is the opposite of what I was reading from Foster.




Just a Guy said:


> ... Btw, I don't think Derek has even made "best seller" status in Canada. To get that status, you only need to sell 5000 copies, so I don't think he's living off the proceeds of his books.


Why not?
He is self-published so as long as he covers the original expenses, each additional copy sold is putting most of the purchase price into his bank account, as profit.

Then too, the NY Times Best Seller List "is published every Sunday, but it is not based on actual sales."
It does not include sales at Walmart where it is not clear if Amazon sales are included.
http://dearauthor.com/features/letters-of-opinion/what-does-bestseller-title-really-mean/

The G&M list is based on BookNet Canada's national sales tracking service, BNC SalesData. They don't seem to list self-published authors so it looks like the only sources of numbers from Foster to make the list would be Librarians and Library Wholesalers. I expect that Library's are not his main source of book sales.


Cheers


*PS*

I see enough inconsistencies to question whether it is people who haven't tried the alleged strategy. BTW, does sixteen years count as "buy and hold"?


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

I believe he wrote his first book at 36, I believe his current age is around 45, not 38 as you claim as "recent". Look below about a reason why a 36 year old may have started managing his portfolio more a few years later...

I would think that I'm someone who says "owning real estate can provide a BETTER lifestyle than working for a pay check", if done properly.

There were time periods where buying real estate was almost effortless. Had you bought real estate 10 years ago (around the time Foster wrote his first book) almost ANYTHING increased in capital gains by around 300% minimum and rents increased at a steady rate while interest rates continued to fall. Today, things have changed because the market did that. Housing is expensive, interest rates need to rise or at least can't fall much more, rents are dropping...now is he time we find out who the REAL investors are, not the byproducts of a market where it was nearly impossible to lose. 

Could the investing market have changed since writing the books? Yep. Two years ago Canada was a very different investing climate with just oil being over $100, today no one really predicted the drop to below $30. If he's 45ish today, he bulk of his investing was during a great market run of the late 90's to today. When did he get in? If it was right after the dot bomb and held until 2007/8 (which would be when he was 38 coincidently) he was in the run up to the bubble, and probably to young to realize it. 

Is real estate investing easy? Depends on the definition. Compared to the amount of work people do for a paycheque, I certain would say it is. To buy high quality, blue chip, dividend paying stocks on a regular basis, buy regularly and consistently no matter what? Sounds pretty simple. In the right market conditions, say just before a market bubble, it can even make a fortune. I just posted an article in a different thread that talks about a $5000 investment in apple in 1994 would be worth almost $900k today (even with the downturn, not including dividends). 

To a 36 year old, who may have hit a bit of luck and not realized it, he may think of himself as a genius. He certainly isn't the only one, many a persona has posted such a thread. Age gives us the maturity to realize the difference.

Has Foster really "given up" and can now be found as a personal greeter at Walmart? Doesn't look like it, he continues to invest. No signs of a "regular paycheque".

As for being a "best selling author", are you seriously saying, had he reached that level, he wouldn't be promoting the hell out of it? Especially as most people have no idea how low a bar that is in Canada?


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Just a Guy said:


> I believe he wrote his first book at 36, I believe his current age is around 45, not 38 as you claim as "recent". Look below about a reason why a 36 year old may have started managing his portfolio more a few years later...


The contradiction between "let it run automatically" and "protecting the portfolio" is dated/described as coming after he sold his portfolio. I don't recall making any claims about his age ... just that he went from "it is automatic" to "I have to sell everything to protect myself" to "it is automatic" in the space of a few years. The write ups that match the second round of "it is automatic" describe far more effort monitoring/protecting the portfolio than is being proposed to the advice being given an in-experiened investor.




Just a Guy said:


> I would think that I'm someone who says "owning real estate can provide a BETTER lifestyle than working for a pay check", * if done properly.*


His advice is supposed to be aimed at in-experienced investors. His 2014 interview has him saying he is one hundred percent in stocks where "Many people would say this is too risky, but really, are you going to stop brushing your teeth because of an economic downturn?".

Would you recommend the same in a RE environment, with a similar "it is automatic" type thinking?
I was pretty sure you had commented that RE was not automatic where due diligence was required.




Just a Guy said:


> Could the investing market have changed since writing the books?
> 
> ... If it was right after the dot bomb and held until 2007/8 (which would be when he was 38 coincidently) he was in the run up to the bubble, and probably to young to realize it.


So on one hand, you are comfortable with him telling in-experienced investors to go with dividends, one hundred percent stocks but OTHO, he might not know that he had benefited from the run up.

This does not sound like a recipe for success to me.

Except for the sell off in 2008/2008, he seems to consistently say dividends are the way to go. Interesting that in the interview, he is quoted from the 2010 book talking about the downturn.


> It was largely because of the 2008-2009 economic downturn. Because my personal situation had changed since I originally left the rat race at 34, (I was earning an income from other sources such as book sales, etc) I wanted to switch my portfolio to higher growing dividend-payers as this would save me tax and generate better returns over the long-term.


Yet I can recall a quote at the time about "I could not stomach anymore losses."

Either he has been badly misquoted or he has the spin going.




Just a Guy said:


> To a 36 year old, who may have hit a bit of luck and not realized it, he may think of himself as a genius. He certainly isn't the only one, many a persona has posted such a thread. Age gives us the maturity to realize the difference.


He says that when he has time, he had another book that "should be written". I am not holding my breath that it sound different as the 2014 interview sounds essentially the same in terms of methods with little mention of due diligence.

He says that he and the family bought a camper then toured North America for a year. What could be easier, right?




Just a Guy said:


> As for being a "best selling author", are you seriously saying, had he reached that level, he wouldn't be promoting the hell out of it? Especially as most people have no idea how low a bar that is in Canada?


He seems to be sure he has reached a high level as he says ...


> ... unexpected surprise (because *being an author or a writer is not usually the path to riches).*


BTW ... it would be interesting to compare the article author's source versus whatever best seller list you are checking. The article confidently profiles Foster.


> Derek is a 6-time National Bestselling author.


http://www.myownadvisor.ca/catching-derek-foster-canadas-youngest-retiree/


Cheers


----------



## CdnStache (Feb 22, 2016)

I don't think it's unreasonable that Derek Foster retired at 34. For those who read MMM and the associated forum there are quite a number of people who retire early. His books also helped me achieve my financial goals. My wife and I retired last year at 32 with two kids. Our house is paid off and we receive about $40k in dividends per year. We also sell options that get us an additional $10-$12k per year. I think people need to change their definition of "retirement." Maybe some wouldn't consider me retired because I spend an hour/week selling options? What about those who receive a pension? Are those guys retired? What happens when my kids start school and I get bored at home and I decide to work at the golf course as a starter part time. I guess I wouldn't be retired then? I would consider Derek Foster retired in his right.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

I think it's foolish to pick up ANY book and think it can lead anyone to riches. Only fools believe such things exist. 

That doesn't mean that his ideas won't work, even if he doesn't follow them himself. 

Investing requires a strategy that matches your personality. 

Starting a business, being a landlord, buying stocks, whatever can all make certain people rich. Day trading, buy and hold, futures, options, margin accounts, whatever are all proven, valid money making strategies for certain people. 

Of course, for the people who do these things, they probably find it relatively easy to do. 

Of course, for the mass majority, it's all voodoo or scams. 

Easy for people to tear down those who travel a different path, and most are just waiting to see them fail, but I respect someone who has the guts to try the road less travelled. He's still finding a way to survive doing something different. I'm sure he's learning along the way and growing his knowledge.

That's way more than those who slave away for a paycheque each month and complain about having to work with no hope of retirement in sight.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Just a Guy said:


> I think it's foolish to pick up ANY book and think it can lead anyone to riches. Only fools believe such things exist.
> That doesn't mean that his ideas won't work, even if he doesn't follow them himself.


With titles like ...
"Stop Working , Here's How You Can! : Using The Strategy Of Canada's Youngest Retiree"
"Stop Working Too , You Still Can! :*Safe Beginner Strategies* From Canada's Millionaire Investor"
"The Lazy Investor"
"Money For Nothing , And Your Stocks For Free: The Financial Catch-Up Strategy From Canada's Youngest Retiree"
"The Idiot Millionaire : You Can Become Wealthy Using This Idiot-Proof Strategy"

He seems confident that it will lead to riches.




Just a Guy said:


> Investing requires a strategy that matches your personality.


I don't recall personality coming into what he wrote in the one I did read. I agree but it does not seem that Foster does.






Just a Guy said:


> Of course, for the people who do these things, they probably find it relatively easy to do.
> Of course, for the mass majority, it's all voodoo or scams.
> 
> Easy for people to tear down those who travel a different path, and most are just waiting to see them fail, but I respect someone who has the guts to try the road less travelled.


I don't see why noticing issues is tearing someone else down.

IAC, I also don't see how his method is any different than a lot of other dividend investors .... except that he seems to be equating his timing leading to having enough for what he needed with "everyone can do it".

Having watched otherwise rationale people pull the trigger then regret their investing moves then give up on investing all together, I'm pretty sure that we all can't be disciplined investors that do well.




Just a Guy said:


> He's still finding a way to survive doing something different. I'm sure he's learning along the way and growing his knowledge.
> That's way more than those who slave away for a paycheque each month and complain about having to work with no hope of retirement in sight.


I'll have to check but I don't recall anyone complaining about having to work with no hope of retirement in sight in this thread.
I suspect that most of the people commenting on this thread have a higher than average chance of retiring early.

If it inspires you to do something ... great. I just don't believe everyone following it will have the stomach to hold in down periods and/or buy more.


Cheers


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

CdnStache said:


> I don't think it's unreasonable that Derek Foster retired at 34.
> For those who read MMM and the associated forum there are quite a number of people who retire early. His books also helped me achieve my financial goals.


For some it is reasonable ... and for others it is a crime that the don't (or they really like what they are doing).

For others where say one has to spend from age 22 to 32 on one year contracts in a different field to have a shot at getting into what one trained for, I am not sure his method will make any difference.


Cheers


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

I suppose you prefer books like "the wealthy barber" which has no real barber, and he way chiton made his money was not what he wrote about. 

How about "the warren buffet way" written by someone who probably has never even met warren buffet. 

Heck, go into any bookstore or library I doubt you'll find a title that says "this book may or may not make you wealthy", hey are all designed to make you think you'll succeed. 

The observation about personality was my own, not foster's. I learned that when I tried other investing strategies. For example, I don't like to follow the markets much, so my personally prevents me from being an effective day trader. No book, or amount of hand holding will change the fact that I won't actually do what's required. That doesn't mean someone else can't be a successful day trader. Not does it change the fact that I could tell you how to be a successful day trader since I know plenty of people who do it and understand the concepts. Many a teacher isn't an expert on the subjects they teach, but can be excellent teachers.


----------



## lost in space (Aug 31, 2015)

Looking for something else I stumbled across an interview he did in 2007 with Canadian Capitalist. He had less than 500 grand in the bank and was living on 25,000 a year. He had a few things moving in his favour, namely he got into the housing market when prices where depressed. What I find most impressive is there are people with 2-3 million in the bank, solid pension plans and are still afraid to retire. Most I know are working to 67 and sometimes 70.

I emailed him the other day and asked him about a blog and he wrote that he was too lazy to be bothered with one, but as I thought about it a more honest answer might have been, too much work for too little money, running a blog is like having a job, only one that pays crap. His website where he sells his books takes zero effort to maintain and probably earns him a few thousand a year, not a lot but way more than he'd make blogging full time. Plus as mentioned if he blogged than he'd be back to working. 

As to the 2007 meltdown again it might have helped it he simply said, I panic sold, realized my mistake and rebought, didn't make any money didn't lose any. 

Secondly the fact that he started with so little money and is now able to winter in Florida with 6 kids means his system works. If I have one complaint, as mentioned his first book doesn't really talk about how he did it. 

Like with Garth Turner there are some ideas I like others I don't.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Just a Guy said:


> I suppose you prefer books like "the wealthy barber" which has no real barber, and he way chiton made his money was not what he wrote about.
> 
> How about "the warren buffet way" written by someone who probably has never even met warren buffet.



I had no idea that my preference for writers was related to how good/bad, effective/ineffective or reproducible or not the method was. Who knew the power of I hold? :biggrin:

I guess I should be careful ... with great power comes great responsibility.





Just a Guy said:


> The observation about personality was my own, not foster's. I learned that when I tried other investing strategies.


You observed it, I have seen it in action, articles I read decades ago commented on it. 


Cheers


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

lost in space said:


> ... As to the 2007 meltdown again it might have helped it he simply said, I panic sold, realized my mistake and rebought, didn't make any money didn't lose any.


The quote from his last book makes it sound like he says he lost money. It talks about taking too long so without details, it could be more of "I missed making more money". 

Like myself where I bought, planned to double up if it dropped further, it dropped but then I decided I had too much concentrated in one sector. 


In any case, the puzzling part for me is that I recall the comment of panicking so this "my income streams had change things" sounds like a rationalization to me.


Cheers


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

I missed seeing this.



Just a Guy said:


> I believe he, or someone posing as him, used to frequent this very forum, or it may have been the other one...either way it was before my time.


Interesting ... if so, the name wasn't clear or we weren't in the same threads.




Just a Guy said:


> I heard he was run off by the membership of the time because, during the downturn, his system wasn't working or he did something different...


It was less confrontational then so I suspect this is not the case.




Just a Guy said:


> Either way, this board no longer has the ability to tap his ideas...even if you didn't agree with them.


I am not sure how much there would be to tap, beyond live frugually and time the market during downturn due to changes in income streams. Maybe the idea to invest a high percentage when young.

Dividend stocks were certainly on the CMF radar. I can also recall recommendations for things that were cycling to buy extra towards the bottom then sell the extra a profit while holding the bulk for the long term.


Cheers


----------



## Synergy (Mar 18, 2013)

lost in space said:


> the fact that he started with so little money and is now able to winter in Florida with 6 kids means his system works./QUOTE]
> 
> There's no doubt his system works. People buying his books and praising his practices are confirmation of that. Oh great guru.


----------



## Oldroe (Sep 18, 2009)

Those dirty words.

"Timing the Market"


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

You seem to like to miss sarcasm, and treat it like literal statements to prove your point (or maybe I'm a poor communicator). You also seem to think that there is no point in posting anything unless it's a new thought, so I guess this board can be shut down, along with the entire publishing industry...

As for his presence, I suggest you do a search (I believe he used his name, but since you don't have to prove identity, anyone could have done that), it was before your time as well judging by your join date and may have been on the other forum. As for the board being "less confrontational", I suggest you actually read some of the threads...

I actually did read a bunch of the threads he participated in and they had the usual "he's trying to pimp his book" attacks, as well as vicious attacks during the downturn, as if the other members were performing much better during the tumble...not surprised he left. It takes a thick skin to deal with such people.


----------



## ashin1 (Mar 22, 2014)

Derek Foster's writing is what got me started into finances. Buying his book was the smartest thing i could have done in my life. Needless to say, If you are in doubt people like this exist, I can tell you right now there is.
I was just a guy who blew his money on sports cars and modifying them, thousands of dollars on shoes and clothing. I was making 80k a year and the most i ever had in my chequings account at once was 5k. Well his writing alone was good enough to change me from a spender into a saver, investor, and more frugal and healthy person.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Just a Guy said:


> You seem to like to miss sarcasm, and treat it like literal statements to prove your point (or maybe I'm a poor communicator).


As you may or may not be aware .... it is a risk of this medium.




Just a Guy said:


> You also seem to think that there is no point in posting anything unless it's a new thought, so I guess this board can be shut down, along with the entire publishing industry...


Let's see ... MoneySaver articles in late '80s profiling how a set of dividend paying stocks is reported as having a better annual return for most years and a better total return than the TSX. The recommended method is to buy dividend stocks.

What is new here, other than the suggestion that one can retire early?
Since you have commented that he might have been lucky versus something everyone can reproduce (i.e. the early retirement), is it really a something reader should pattern their life after?




Just a Guy said:


> As for his presence, I suggest you do a search (I believe he used his name, but since you don't have to prove identity, anyone could have done that), it was before your time as well judging by your join date and may have been on the other forum.


You haven't heard about reading a board for a long time before signing up to post?

As for searches, there's ten pages of "read Derek Foster's book", "I don't like ...", "a la Derek Foster", "I am considering the Derek Foster", "I bought a Derek Foster book that was not helpful", "comparison to Derek Foster", "and Derek Foster", "unread the Derek Foster stuff", "just read Derek Foster's book "How to Stop Working" and I really see the merit of dividend paying stocks as a bond substitute", "Foster ... talk about bad market timing" etc.

I especially liked ...


> "So you're the real Derek Foster!"
> 
> Many people have commented to me that I am the real Derek Foster.
> Not to be too brash,( I am not a multi, multi, multi, millionaire), but my portfolio is much larger than his, I live in a nice area of Toronto, have absolutely no debts, ...and I can live on less, as I do have only 1 teenage child,,soon to go the university.



Not much that looks like anyone claiming to be DF. The search does stop at 2012 so maybe it's farther back. It may well be under a different name as the "Friends and Contacts" shows nothing that looks close.




Just a Guy said:


> As for the board being "less confrontational", I suggest you actually read some of the threads...
> I actually did read a bunch of the threads he participated in and they had the usual "he's trying to pimp his book" attacks, as well as vicious attacks during the downturn, as if the other members were performing much better during the tumble...not surprised he left.


I guess when I was reading in 2007 or so I happened to miss those threads ... but wait, you don't believe me as I started posting 2010 so I guess it is moot. :biggrin:


IAC, my "market timing" in 2008 was to sell Agrium for $100+ then rebuy for about $50. I also bought around twelve to fifteen stocks where about three were sold for a loss as I gave up too early (30% and about 5%) and the rest gained between 80% through 200+%, while paying between 8% to 30% dividends. Last I checked, nothing I held cut their dividends in this period, so my income gained rather than dropped.

I also messed up by not doubling up on my best buy or putting enough into the US market but oh well.

This is an anonymous board so believe or be a skeptic as you see fit.


Cheers


----------



## yupislyr (Nov 16, 2009)

lost in space said:


> I emailed him the other day and asked him about a blog and he wrote that he was too lazy to be bothered with one, but as I thought about it a more honest answer might have been, too much work for too little money, running a blog is like having a job, only one that pays crap. His website where he sells his books takes zero effort to maintain and probably earns him a few thousand a year, not a lot but way more than he'd make blogging full time. Plus as mentioned if he blogged than he'd be back to working.


Weblogging can be quite lucrative for some. I take it you haven't heard of Mr. Money Mustache? He's a Canadian living in the US that became financially independent at age 30. His weblog of mostly posts on how he reached said financial independence, frugality, etc made $400,000 last year. Source:http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/02/29/mr-money-mustache-the-frugal-guru

And I wouldn't get hung up on the whole "working" thing after "retirement". If it's something that you want to do, fine. Once retired/financially independent you don't have to work or do anything you don't want to, and that's the point. You could absolutely not do any kind of work and be just fine.


----------



## avrex (Nov 14, 2010)

tygrus said:


> I think with no debt and 750k investments it is achievable.


Coincidentally, there is a thread named exactly that.

Fire on $750k invested?


----------

