Comments on: Missing Name on Forbes 400 List http://thefinancebuff.com/2007/09/missing-name-on-forbes-400-list.html like a friend telling you about money ... Thu, 19 Nov 2009 19:44:17 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8 hourly 1 By: TFB http://thefinancebuff.com/2007/09/missing-name-on-forbes-400-list.html/comment-page-1#comment-252 TFB Thu, 27 Sep 2007 17:39:00 +0000 http://blog.thefinancebuff.com/?p=171#comment-252 @enoughwealth, I don't know enough about the investing environment in Australia. The cost of doing business may be higher there or perhaps Vanguard doesn't have the kind of economy of scale they enjoy here in the U.S. I'm glad to know Vanguard is still cheaper than alternatives in Australia. I'm curious to know who owns Vanguard Australia. The Australian funds, or the Vanguard funds in the U.S.?<br/><br/>@Ted, a point of clarification. Ben Graham died in 1976. The Forbes 1982-2002 story could not have come from Ben Graham. Jason Zweig inserted that as his annonation to Graham's book. I hate it. It's like having someone scribble over a masterpiece of art. I think you should read straight Graham, not Graham interlaced with someone else's interpretation. @enoughwealth, I don't know enough about the investing environment in Australia. The cost of doing business may be higher there or perhaps Vanguard doesn't have the kind of economy of scale they enjoy here in the U.S. I'm glad to know Vanguard is still cheaper than alternatives in Australia. I'm curious to know who owns Vanguard Australia. The Australian funds, or the Vanguard funds in the U.S.?

@Ted, a point of clarification. Ben Graham died in 1976. The Forbes 1982-2002 story could not have come from Ben Graham. Jason Zweig inserted that as his annonation to Graham's book. I hate it. It's like having someone scribble over a masterpiece of art. I think you should read straight Graham, not Graham interlaced with someone else's interpretation.

]]> By: Ted http://thefinancebuff.com/2007/09/missing-name-on-forbes-400-list.html/comment-page-1#comment-251 Ted Thu, 27 Sep 2007 15:59:00 +0000 http://blog.thefinancebuff.com/?p=171#comment-251 It goes without saying that Mr. Bogle is an extraordinary person.<br/><br/>My reason for commenting is tangential to your post related to the Forbes 400 list.<br/><br/>I was reading Benjamin Graham's book <i>The Intelligent Investor</i>, and it compared the Forbes lists from 1982 and 2002. I think only 15% of the people on the list in 1982 were still on the list in 2002. <br/><br/>The kicker is that someone on the list in 1982 only had to average a measly money market 5% ROI on their net worth to remain on the list in 2002. Note that the S&P 500 during this period went from 120 to 1148, which is about 12% annual growth rate.<br/><br/>What's the point? I don't know, maybe the majority of the Forbes class of 1982 invested with the Fidelities and the Templetons instead of with Jack and his 500 index fund. It goes without saying that Mr. Bogle is an extraordinary person.

My reason for commenting is tangential to your post related to the Forbes 400 list.

I was reading Benjamin Graham's book The Intelligent Investor, and it compared the Forbes lists from 1982 and 2002. I think only 15% of the people on the list in 1982 were still on the list in 2002.

The kicker is that someone on the list in 1982 only had to average a measly money market 5% ROI on their net worth to remain on the list in 2002. Note that the S&P 500 during this period went from 120 to 1148, which is about 12% annual growth rate.

What's the point? I don't know, maybe the majority of the Forbes class of 1982 invested with the Fidelities and the Templetons instead of with Jack and his 500 index fund.

]]> By: enoughwealth@yahoo.com http://thefinancebuff.com/2007/09/missing-name-on-forbes-400-list.html/comment-page-1#comment-250 enoughwealth@yahoo.com Thu, 27 Sep 2007 15:42:00 +0000 http://blog.thefinancebuff.com/?p=171#comment-250 Yes, all well and good for the US Vanguard investors, but what about us Aussies? The Australian Vanguard funds all charge much higher fees than the US equivalents (as far as I can tell), although they are still cheaper than the 'actively managed' Australian funds. I suspect that the Australian Vanguard investors are either a) paying for Vanguard's costs to market the funds extensively in Australia and try to capture market share, or b) making a profit for the US parent company.<br/><br/>I'm still a fan of Vanguard in Australia, but I wish my investments with them didn't have to pay 0.7% fees (the fee drops to "only" 0.35% on balances PER FUND over $100,000)...<br/><br/>Regards<br/>http://enoughwealth.com Yes, all well and good for the US Vanguard investors, but what about us Aussies? The Australian Vanguard funds all charge much higher fees than the US equivalents (as far as I can tell), although they are still cheaper than the 'actively managed' Australian funds. I suspect that the Australian Vanguard investors are either a) paying for Vanguard's costs to market the funds extensively in Australia and try to capture market share, or b) making a profit for the US parent company.

I'm still a fan of Vanguard in Australia, but I wish my investments with them didn't have to pay 0.7% fees (the fee drops to "only" 0.35% on balances PER FUND over $100,000)…

Regards
http://enoughwealth.com

]]>