Homepage
PR Newswire
17-05-2012, 11:38 AM
(17-05-2012, 10:23 AM)CityFarmer Wrote: Let's me join the crowd with my opinion.
I concur with KopiKat that relevance is necessary in a discussion of investment's creditability.
IMO, The statement of "If you are a car salesman and you can't tolerate people kicking the tyres, then you are just a lousy salesman or the car that you are selling is lousy" is valid if kicking types means dig out all his investment track record, financial wellness etc.
Having said that, I am unlikely be an investor of the alternative investment. I am already hesitated to invest in S-Chips, which are binded with Listing Manual, under SGX's regulation and must operate for at least 5 years before listing (am i right?). I am not able to imagine that one day I will invest in an "un-regulated" alternative investment.
I hope i did not join the club of "wasting your time". If yes, my apologies
I am thinking along your line. There are so many "better & safer" stocks in SGX or other markets, why bother. IMHO(No offence to anyone).
WB:-
1) Rule # 1, do not lose money.
2) Rule # 2, refer to # 1.
3) Not until you can manage your emotions, you can manage your money.
Truism of Investments.
A) Buying a security is buying RISK not Return
B) You can control RISK (to a certain level, hopefully only.) But definitely not the outcome of the Return.
NB:-
My signature is meant for psychoing myself. No offence to anyone. i am trying not to lose money unnecessary anymore.
1) Rule # 1, do not lose money.
2) Rule # 2, refer to # 1.
3) Not until you can manage your emotions, you can manage your money.
Truism of Investments.
A) Buying a security is buying RISK not Return
B) You can control RISK (to a certain level, hopefully only.) But definitely not the outcome of the Return.
NB:-
My signature is meant for psychoing myself. No offence to anyone. i am trying not to lose money unnecessary anymore.