http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/rough-2008-do-2009-book/story.aspx?guid={FF938964-568D-411A-83C4-9100035FFD2A}&dist=msr_3

Rick has written 5 books to help the investing public understand that fees matter. His books show do-it-yourself investors how to reduce their costs.

For those who really want a professional to help them with the asset allocation decisions and routine rebalancing chores, his firm, Portfolio Solutions (http://www.portfoliosolutions.com), offers low-cost .25% professional portfolio management services. It’s a great alternative to high-priced traditional investment management.

Sheryl Garrett and her network fee-only, hourly financial planners (http://www.garrettplanningnetwork.com) are big fans of Ferri and his approach. So is Jonathan Clements.

I think Bogleheads will be particularly interested in Ferri’s approach to low-cost investing.

I was reminded of this when I saw this link:
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=4354

That link shows how Mr. Schiff understands the situation. We can’t just write him off just because he makes us fell uneasy.

And, two of those females served on the Q&A With the Experts Panel.

So, females are definitely welcome in Boglehead land.

Best regards to all,

Mel Lindauer

“If you invest in a fund of Funds (such as Vanguard STAR) do you pay the management fee on that fund as well as the management fee for each of the funds the STAR owns? I realize that all the fees al low on Vanguard funds but I feel that the Expense ratio of 0.32% does not accurately reflect the total cost of owning such a fund.”

—————

Hey Brad,

The answer is no, Vanguard’s STAR fund expense ratio is not an extra layer of expenses on top of the funds inside STAR. STAR’s total expense ratio is only the weighted expenses ratios of the underlying funds. Same goes with Vanguard’s Target Retirement series, which you’ll notice has lower ERs than STAR because it is made up of all low cost index funds. You’ll find this information in the prospectus of the STAR fund on Vanguard’s website.

Some companies do try to tack on an extra expense ratio on fund-of-funds, but Vanguard is not one of them.

Best,
Peter
aka Boglehead poster ‘NYCPete’ on http://www.bogleheads.org

Glad to see you enjoyed your time with the local Diehards, including my buddy Bruce.

I’m in the process of securing George Kinder to speak at the FPA Mid Winter Conference here in the Portland Metro area in Feburary 2009, so I’m pretty confident you’ll get the opportunity to meet him in person.

I would love to learn more about unconventional investments strategies.

JD your blog rocks. I never miss a day .

The point is that we all have to make conscious efforts to diversify different groups and situations. So, I encourage your group to consciously reach out to women financial leaders, bloggers, or enthusiasts for your next meeting.

Yes, the absence of women was noticeable and obvious. I don’t think it was due to any intentional exclusion, though. This group was organized on the Diehards forums, I think, and there may not be a lot of female participants there.

I agree 100% that women need this information, too!

I’m also in the industry and I’ve seen the behavior you’re talking about. I think part of it might have to do with their experience, education, and counsel. If they don’t have much invested then they probably don’t have a lot of experience investing. Additionally, they are probably still learning and usually can’t afford good counsel. The strength of having a trustworthy financial planner is the good advice and education they can provide you with so you’re less likely to make very detrimental mistakes.

Glad to hear you learned about George Kinder and Sheryl Garrett. I think you’ll really like some of Kinder’s approach to personal finance. The Garrett Planning Network is a great tool for people who don’t want a planner who is paid by commissions or assets under management (AUM). It’s a good option if you don’t have a lot of money to invest right now or if you don’t agree with the AUM model.

As far as income investing goes, I think you should look a little closer at the “total return” concept. It’s easy to want to use income investing because it’s easier to understand, but if you look at where the appreciation in the stock market has come from it’s a combination of capital appreciation and income. You can’t look at just one to support you through retirement, especially if you want to stay on top of inflation.

I’m in the industry, and probably most similar to Tom in the story from above. I wanted to make a comment on “investor behavior” for your readers to consider.

Do you think investors behave differently at certain income levels or savings levels? How do they behave differently? I can tell you now that when the markets tanked during October, people with less than (approximately) 100k behaved significantly different from investors with 100k+ in the market. Also, people who did not have an emergency fund behaved significantly different than those who did, generally to their own detriment.

These actions lead me to believe that people with substantial assets tend to ride out the market and not worry about short-term fluctuations, whereas people with smaller amounts of assets lock in losses by removing assets from the market at poor times. Then, when/if they get back in, they’ve missed out on several days of big gains.

Anyone care to elaborate or discuss? This may seem obvious, but as it was happening I was shocked by the clear income demarcation that seemed to separate rational behavior from irrational behavior. Do small investors make behavioral mistakes that keep them from becoming wealthy?

However, I also believe that having and using the right tools is only a small part of the successful investing equation.

The real key is your behavior and whether or not you have the emotional & psychological discipline to hold on to your investments during times when everyone else is screaming that “the sky is falling”

Great post – thanks.