What is the biggest, or most regrettable, investing mistake you will never make again?
Either something that you had done (or not done), or wished you had done (or not done).
This is not to humiliate anyone.
But I would like to (try to) avoid getting myself into unnecessary investment pain.
And perhaps reading mistakes that other people have made might be really helpful.
It might help other people in the group as well.
Thank you very much for sharing.
@Autonomic: Also im not saying to invest in crypto but you need to realise ANYONE who buys and sells something is a 'Zero sum game'
You're logic isnt wrong it just applies to EVERY market transaction - to say this is a reason crypto is bad is stupid if anything taxes on property make it s negative sum gain based on your argument
and property generally has been a brilliant investment in the major cities
Fees on crypto and share trading make it a negative sum game?
in the end of the day crypto has been around for 12 years now and BTC has appreciated to a point no one would of thought it could have - if it was going to die it would of died a long time ago - not everything you learn in a textbook is right and the fundamentals got this wrong
@Autonomic: Trying2SaveABuck, I have a feeling that Autonomic doesn't own any crypto.
Usually the biggest crypto haters don't own any or have completely missed the boat.
@Autonomic: Let's check back in 5 years and see what your returns look like.
And before anyone says I'm biased towards crypto.
I own property and shares.
@Ilikeozbargain: It's not about returns. Crypto is a zero sum game. This isn't a controversial statement. It's an undeniable fact.
@Autonomic: So is every other investment (property, shares etc.).
That is also not a controversial statement.
That is also an undeniable fact.
@Autonomic: I think you should also look up the definition for what "zero sum" means.
You are getting the definition wrong.
Zero-sum is a situation in game theory in which one person's gain is equivalent to another's loss,
How am I getting it wrong? Also I've already explained how property and shares are not zero sum.
@Trying2SaveABuck: Lol 🤣 who in the right mind would invest in AMP? They should lose money of course.
@Autonomic: I think crypto is kind of like trading the shares of a bankrupt company.
Meaning there is no underlying value. Just shares which represent nothing really at all.
@trapper: As i said before a lot of the good cryptos have application uses for real world problems it is just most people understand how they work
@Trying2SaveABuck: I agree that there can be applications for real world problems, particularly the blockchain public ledger concept.
Just no actual underlying monetary value of any kind.
@trapper: Usefulness can indeed be represented by monetary value. You could even argue that the value of the shares of a company reflects how useful it's being perceived to the economy it operates in.
Crypto was good, until stock-exchange tactics have ruined the crypto markets
it's all about lending money, shorting, derivatives, etc…
Nah bro, that's called the evolution of crypto. It's a good thing.
this is beyond the scope of OzB and a short reply,
but the same behaviours that had led to inequality, slavery
are being used in crypto now, with even more precision.
it's not "evolution" of anything, if we are going
ideologically and philosophically backwards as a race.
Usury in blockchain form?
Draconian "social credit" smart-contracts on your own biometric NFT?
@whyisave: "Draconian "social credit" smart-contracts on your own biometric NFT?"
This is not some authoritarian regime owned by a central power, the ethos of crypto is the complete opposite of that.
Decentralised systems opposed to a blockchain owned by a centralised party.
@Ilikeozbargain: I'm not talking about the theories, but the practicals.
I understand the "ethos" part,…it's all holistic and what not.
I'm just seeing how the technology is being used in exactly the same ways,
because people's greed is being magnified through blockchain
and authoritarianism using blockchain is rising too.
Our identity will move into NFTs,
which will sit on a blockchain,
and smart-contracts will run against the NFT,
similarly to how .CN runs its "social credit" score.
We all have a 'credit score' anyway,
when we need to apply for home loans,
and this is moving onto the blockchain.
Systems can run in a 'decentralized' way,
but that does not mean the intention of the system will be benevolent.
Centralized / Decentralized talk is about decision-makers,
but if a system is created with the intention that is maligned,
the outcome is still bleak.
@whyisave: That's a very specific application of blockchain and that's currently restricted to China.
Also China has it's own central database that already does all of that, why would it need blockchain? Same with governments around the world.
Do you think the US would want to share the same blockchain with China? Fat chance.
You are looking at only one negative application of blockchain.
What about giving power to the unbanked around the world? Those who don't have access to financial services.
@Ilikeozbargain: Like I said earlier, that my comment
was beyond the scope of OzB and to be answered within a short reply.
BTC 'white paper' was a response to Central Bank behaviour post-GFC.
The ethos was good & benevolent,
ie. decentralized, distributed, currency in people's hands
( away from the U.S. Fed Reserve which is a private corporation )
I watched it for last 10-years go from that, to what it is now.
That's why I said, stock-market tactics has ruined the ethos.
Derivatives, Usury, etc… read into all that.
It's the same inequalities from the past, being ingrained into blockchains.
Then, blockchains have moved beyond just currencies,
but distributed databases will hold NFTs,
and when you start applying 'smart contracts' on NFTs - linked to our identities
then, where is this 'ethos' of crypto which is supposed to free mankind of central authorities?
It's getting worse.
Wait & see.
I don't think you understand what I'm saying,
and it's somehow linked to something China is doing
or "sharing same blockchain" with U.S.
I'm just disturbed by the trends and behaviours
humans pre- and post- blockchains.
( I'm watching this space since 1990s .
Cryptocurrencies have accelerated the greed too )
As for the "unbanked" around the world,
what does 'getting power' look like?
What is this 'power'?
It's a vague term, … humans have not solved 'before' blockchain or cryptocurrencies ?
How is usury being eradicated with blockchain ?
I raised important concepts several times,
but the replies don't address them.
I could go on, but this thread is not about this
and I was making a passing comment,
about the "ethos" has been ruined
by creating a market of the "ethos".
People shouldn't create markets out of things like
sun, air, water… it's there for everyone's benefit,
like crypto… it ends up becoming a market,
with short-selling, derivative instruments, usury
….all in crypto space, in last few years.
Same old-world ugliness.
Look at what is happening,
with mining pools in Russia and China.
how do you prevent collusion?
51% attacks have already happened,
and it can happen again.
I'm more interested in blockchains being used to bring
transparencies to charity organizations, politicians,
weapons manufacturers, etc.
Look at Aragon and how it's reinventing governance
and justice system, in a blockchain way,
with jurors, courts, judge. It's fascinating,
but eventually, we all need to be a NFT for anything to work properly,
and that's what will suck, when our freedoms will be curbed even more.
This is all wonderful hindsight.
Everyone could have made 100x more if we all look at the what ifs.
Be grateful for what you have, happy with what you have, and do not live with regrets.
Looking back is only useful if you learn something from it.
Looking at the previous boom/bust cycle of crypto won't guarantee a similar future, but it's got a good chance of beating all the numpties on here buying crypto now, somewhere in the peak.
Invested with Mel after a ski trip in Aspen. Now she has disappeared and all I have got left was a foot in wet sneaker
BITCONNECT!!!
Wazza wazza wazzup! Bitconnect!
whatamigonnnadoooo ?!
Not knowing a lot more about Super earlier so not investigating a decent long term performing Super fund until years later.
Sometimes your best investments are the ones you don’t make.- DTrump (some guy with more money then us)
Easy to say when you inherit your wealth from your father.
Lost a few grand on autosurfs/12 daily pro…
Be careful of the win a little, lose a lot issue with investing.
this is a good starting point for advice (regarding potential mistakes)
nothing huge on its own. like a few others timbercorp shares. Generally though two things.
a) letting emotion get involved. You are investing for profit, not because you like a company or a brand or believe in their political/environmental/PC statements. It all comes down to dollars and cents, for anything else you have charity.
b) thinking you are in this deep, no point pulling out now. It doesn't matter how much you have already lost, an investment decision should always be about how much more you can lose or make based on the current and future position. It is never too late to get out (unless it is already at zero).
Waiting for house prices to go down. They don't, the best time to buy is always now.
Perth people might have something to say about that…
Where to start? I'll talk about shares and expensive lessons that I have learned. Following is all my personal opinions only.
companies with triple or more leverage:
ttn/titan was a company supplying serviced mine camp sites and extra drill rigs to natural gas explorers. So with hindsight, let's unpack the leverage there:
1) the gas industry itself was experiencing very high prices, leading to lots of demand, so that's one kind of leverage.
2) the company, by its very nature, supplied excess capacity. Capacity that was only needed when things were going well, and was the very first to be dropped when things weren't going well.
3) debt - the company had tried to expand quickly so put was up to its eyeballs in debt.
What happened - gas prices fell, they had some downgrades, lost basically all of their customers overnight, more downgrades, couldn't pay their debts, went into administration, shares stopped trading, eventually relished/listing taken over as one of those business that bought consumer stuff to send to China (eg milk powder). Outcome 99.9% loss.
Lessons: don't buy anyone with triple leverage. Don't try to catch a falling knife. Cut losses.
another triple leverage: siv / silver chef. They supplied rental kitchen gear to restaurants and cafes. Same 3 leverages as above (although not quite as bad), plus they found fraud. It was really the fraud the triggered their problems, if this had not happened I think it would have decreased in price very slowly. Around 90% loss (they sold businesses quickly to pay off debt, didn't get great prices).
Lessons: don't buy anything with triple leverage. Cut losses. Sometimes bad things happen that nobody foresaw (nobody predicted this fraud before it happened).
Don't buy LICs that do raisings at below NTA.
The above lessons cost me about $55 k. They were sufficiently expensive that I hope I'll never forget them.
BCI has so much potential with their new salt and potash mine. I predict $10 within the next decade.
I had a bit of a read of their stuff based on your comment. Would you mind elaborating on why you think it'll reach $10? It seems like they've already hit their market worth given its all live now?
I'm in mining but know very little about the start up investing side so you've really piqued my interest!
I'll have to pull out my dd for you if I can find it. I wouldn't say they've hit their market worth yet since they haven't even finished building let a lone making any sort of profit off it yet. They're definitely a company to keep on your watch list if mining is something you're interested in.
@[Deactivated]: Sorry, to be clear I wasn't disagreeing with you, I just don't know how to evaluate start ups. My understanding was that if the mine has already been purchased, approved etc and there ins't any risk of deposits that the market will have already taken all this into account.
Keen to hear your insight :)
getting married and losing half or all…dont even think about it if u already have 1 or more properties
Huge risk for little reward, there's literally no reason to get married unless your partner brings more to the table than you do.
Even if you don't you will likely be defacto within 6 months of living together and still have to lose half your shit. Unless you just mean swearing off relationships in general, which is emotionally and developmentally expensive
this… there's no difference between married and defacto.
If you live with someone for more than 6 months you're already "married"
Getting divorced doesn't mean you'll loose 1/2 your shit either unless there are other circumstances that call for that.
eg: you have kids, and agree for the wife to be a stay at home mum for a decade.
You'd have to opt out on relatioships, does anyone really want to live like that?
I do recommend marrying someone that has a similar or more net worth.. it's kinda a cold thing to say, but at least you know they want to get ahead in life (well hopefully you do as well)
Huge risk for little reward, there's literally no reason to get married
Kids are worth the risk.
You can sign a pre-nap (or whatever it's called in Australia)
Called a 'financial agreement' in Australia.
And why anyone entering into relationship and financial commitments with another human would not do so is hard to imagine.
Given that family breakups are possibly the single most stressful events in most people's lives, that fighting over children and money are the ruin and despair for so many people. Roughly 40% of all marriages, perhaps more of defacto relationships, end in divorce/separation. And many relationships stay together solely because it is so difficult and stressful to separate/extricate.
If it is so difficult to talk to a future life partner about this, prior to that commitment, and that the possibility that they may be 'offended' or upset by such discussion, I think one should seriously consider how suitable you are going to be together.
"Oh, we're in love", doesn't cut much mustard four years later when one partner is unemployed, unskilled, struggling trying to get support for three screaming toddlers, or another partner is sleeping by the river in the back of an HX panel van.
I think statutory mandated financial agreements should be compulsory in any relationship with shared financial obligations.
What's the easiest way to get one?
I'm not sure they are suitable for most people. Despite the completely understandable difficulty of bringing it up. I just dont believe most people have the assets to even make it worth cost and stress. Add to this, that most of the time people marry people of similar socio-economic backgrounds and similar age.
There will be times, when it makes sense, getting married in your 40s, when theres a big age gap, when one party has siginificant pre-marriage assets.
But really, even though most Australians get married later than they did. What assets do most late-20s to Early 30 year olds have. What 20% equity in a first house or IP?
If you are married a short period of time, then the split is very unlikely to be 50-50. If you are married 10+ years its more likely to be 50-50. People just need to realise that when they marry someone, they are accepting what their economic potential is. IF you decide as a family it makes more sense for someone to stay home and look after kids, then that is their equal contribution. If you make 200k a year and your partner makes 40k per year being an instagram influencer and maker on etsy, that is their equal contribution. You will be better off for their 40k than without, even if its not as much 'cash' as you bring in, that was their contribution. If you are married or in a serious defacto relationship, you just need to consider your assets shared, your income shared, just as your life is shared. It's a great opportunity to build something together, greather than you can build apart. When you divorce you are not losing 50%, you are regaining all of your contribution (in effort) to the relationship and assets of the relationship.
tl;dr no one is forcing you into a relationship with a penniless, dumb, pretty face. It's no ones fault but yours for the choices you make.
@modiika: With your rationale then, no-one has any complaints or grievances when marriage or defacto relationship ends in separation? (Like 40% of all marriages will.) And everybody is perfectly happy with the financial settlements because "people marry people of similar socio-economic backgrounds"?
The main problem, of course, is the 'proprietorship' or 'ownership' that the very concept of marriage encapsulates. In the west, in the last hundred or so years, marriage has implied and encouraged co-dependence, control, domination and actual disenfranchisement.
We have been sold a Bronte-based romance that 'being in love' and forming a relationship with another person necessitates total surrender of self (er, usually the woman's self), and that it is intended to last 'a lifetime'. And of course religious institutions have ridden this donkey all the way as well. In earlier times marriage was more fluid, and the church way more interested in continued procreation than 'happy ever after'.
We seem to have this notion that lifetime marriage is somehow a natural state for humans, and has existed forever, when the evidence of thousands of years indicates this is far from reality.
I would imagine many of the hard-nosed economic realists in this forum would appreciate the idea of an encompassing financial agreement prior to entering into an economic partnership. Specifying things like separate bank accounts, accounting for expenses, quantifying non-compensatory work (eg, child rearing, housework, etc). Terms and conditions for termination/separation, etc. One would expect this in any other business.
@Roman Sandstorm: And yet its not a business.
All the power to you in the world if you and your partner are happy treating it as a business.
I think the real problem is people not understanding what the commitment actually means and expecting their to be no consequences.
I have no problem if people never want to marry.
Also I said most people marry people of similar socio-economic backgrounds. Which as a result means, they will generally have a fairly similar financial contribution to the relationship, and in which case 50-50 will largely be equitable anyway.
I am yet to see any detailed complaint of 'she took half my shit' as the result of the courts, that wasn't actually fairly reasonable. Most people just have no selfawareness and are over entitled.
You want to argue marriage doesnt make sense and modern romance is a fantasy. That's fine, dont get married then.
Buying altcoins
Lost few grands on BOT
When I landed first job in Australia, I bought commodore for $20k. 4 years I sold this car for $6k.
I still wonder why I poured so much money into this stupid purchase. It delayed my house purchase by 1 year and the property prices raised significantly in 2013/14.
I used to be into cars too, and spent a pretty penny, nothing fancy, but just swapping cars every couple of years takes a toll on your finances.
if you're sligthly hoonish, and end up spending money on mods, even worse.
don't do it kids, it's not worth it..
I came to Australia as soon as I was an adult for further studies, signed off the my legal powers of inheritance to my parent. Parent sold the inheritance and took complete control of my share. Never received a dime as rent, sales proceeds and nothing is in my name anymore. I found out about this after covid hit and I wanted control of my share as I was fearing going bankrupt. Can't do anything about it now.
Since when do you have rights to an “inheritance”?
The assets are either yours or belong to someone else (ie your parents). If it’s the latter, then surely as their assets, they can do what they like with it?
Its a bit unclear. Lets assume that a wealth family member bequethed part of their assets to their children, but also part directly to their grandchildren. Let's say the asset was % share in a company that owned and managed some commerical real estate.
If op was the grandchild, they may have signed control of that asset to their parent who flittered it away, separate to any right that the parent may have had to share of the same asset.
You are right. It is a bit complicated. It is property my grandfather owned and then passed down as a joint undivided family. Upon division during sale all adults get equal share. I had signed the powers away to parent thinking I would still have control of my share and it felt like a no brainer to trust them back then before I arrived here but they simply took everything. Probably could have paid for a decent chunk towards a house and starting up a business.
Get liquidated.
A family friend offered to sell me his modest home in Glen Waverley in 2000 for around 320K. The house is only 2 blocks away from Glen Waverley Secondary.
I was very young, just starting out and was scared getting into such a large mortgage, so I declined.
Not changing my high risk investment strategy with my super when covid first hit. Lost about 80k in a month.
and if untouched, its likely almost back to where it was in Feb
nice brag also ;)
I sufferred the same covid pain on super. (I am not going to brag BTW), but it had fully recovered, and now is far exceeding pre covid value, and has been for some months now.
In 1999, a house was for sale for 50k near me, it was one of those old portable ones on decent land in north of adelaide.
Pretty sure was so cheap as needed heavy Reno, I basically laughed at my parents at the idea of buying it.
Basically could of owned my first house while living at home after 3 years, back then my wage was 12 a hour. Think 19 years of rental income gone
https://i.imgur.com/gNBtj3t.jpg
In 2015 I bought 100,000 FMG shares, then sold them a week later making myself a tidy $30,000 (paying 50% CGT on the profit).
I thought I was smarter than Warren Buffet.
Today those shares would be worth $2.3m.
But you know, the biggest regret was selling my hot hot hot turbo charged v8 Calais. I sold it for a mere $5k, as I didn’t want to deal with the hoon audience the car would attract.
It’s been nearly 4 years and not a day goes by I don’t regret it.
Why were you paying 50% on the capital gain when the top tax rate was 45%?
Budget repair levy…. 2%
Medicare levy…. 2%
Medicare levy surcharge… 1.5%
That's 50.5% total.
Not having the balls to go all in TSLA a few years ago.
I had VMW shares at the time and they were pretty much trending sideways for several years. Then in 2018, they paid a huge dividend. I decided to put these to TSLA and was contemplating selling my rest of my VMW holdings to purchase more shares in TSLA. However, I calculated the capital gain tax payable and decided against it (it would have been around $15k). The small amount I had bought in TSLA is now 13x (it was 18x at the peak) and if I had gone all in, I could be holding a million $ in TSLA. Biggest regret for being a cheapskate on the CGT.
Buying a long term hold property in a family trust structure.
Family trusts get DOUBLE the land tax.
This was an accountants failure in not telling me this.
Once in the trust and once distributed?
Land tax surcharge for trusts acquiring land after 2006..
You also can't get out of capital gains tax by claiming it as a PPOR.
Hooking up with my secretary,
Famous last words :)
“I did not have sexual relations with that woman”.
Not taking my financial education more seriously when I was younger.
"Formal education will make you a living; self-education will make you a fortune."
Jim Rohn
Yeah don't ever use one of those alcohol / cigarettes / drugs cost calculators.
I don't even smoke but the drinking cost alone made me cry. Especially in the glory days of everyone working part-time/uni/no rent/bills…
BCI, RGS and ACR are my worst investments, followed by FMG at a bad time and TLS. The lesson is learn and keep investing. It’s mostly just luck so now I’m more in index funds.
I ignore crypto, no regrets there.
Marrying someone for the outer beauty, rather then their inner beauty
Sooner or later the wrinkles will appear and so will the snake…
Yikes! You win bro
When I met my current partner I would have given her a 6/10.
I remember a conversation with my sister about 4 months later.
Me: "I don't get it. The more I hang out with her, the better looking she gets"
Sister "That's because you are seeing the inner beauty."
A pretty woman is never really yours.
Plus beauty fades.
Listen to a friends investing advice without doing any research
Had 80k. Could have Bought Mint mid 80's Porsche 911. Put it into a Managed Fund instead. Managed Fund now $72k Mint Mid 80's 911 now $200k *Scenario does not allow for income received in dividends or maintenance and running costs of said 911
Are you suggesting an $80,000 car is an investment in yourself
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Not buying a house right off the bat. I wish I had just gotten a warehouse job right out of high school instead of going to uni and bought a house then when it was 1/4th the price it is now.
To not invest… or will it be a mistake to invest… should I put money on red or black, always feel like it's a gamble and I don't like to gamble.
Cars and yachts.. Never again. Gold and property are far more reliable .
Leaving my avocado tree in my investment property
That's Tough. All that green and gold………………lost :-)))))
Crowdfunding. Never again
Xinja Bank - Spent their money on fancy offices. Started a high interest deposit account but didn't have a loan product. Dumbo investors still voting to keep a company going that doesn't have a product. Just shoot the poor dead horse.
DC Power Company. Barrier to entry for shareholders was too low ($50). They couldn't deliver at the price they implied they could. Too much hype.
RhynoHide 4WD body protection. I assume they are doing OK but they only update shareholders once a year.
Endeavour Brewing Co. Poor shareholder communication. Delayed financials. 3 of the founders sacked with some probity question marks by the board of directors. One recently re-hired.
I'm of the conclusion that if these companies were good investments the equity firms would have put money in.
Yeah I got burned on some early Crowdfunding things (bone conduction earphones while the tech was still unready 2013-15).
Amazed to hear about Xinja dying, I had people send me links during the first Neobank hype wave but I already had another neo-account linked to a stock app.
They had a total net asset value $8.5m and $6.5m in cash and took out a $7m lease on the old King St Facebook offices. They've now given that up (I assume at some cost for breaking the lease) and moved to Lavender Bay. I'm sure that's cheap too.
I'd guess there were a lot of other stupid expenditures too.
I'll note that DC Power Co has just announced they are pulling out of retail power and solar and attempting to do something else with batteries.
Just shoot me
Haha funny you mention solar.
I bought into some Solar ETFs in early January after watching most of them grow through Q3/Q4 2020.
Welp its basically dived almost 30% over Q1 2021…lol
I knew but never considered using a "stop loss order" because I was overly-confident.
This would have saved me about $2500 on my investment in ASX: A2M.
$2500 is chump change compared to my unrealized loss
@Autonomic: That crypto has value? that within the crypto market in which people pay $$ for does it not?