4 Steps To Pension Heaven

Published in Investing on 9 September 2011

Fewer of us are saving for a pension.

Well, I can't say that I'm surprised. Although, to judge from the furore, it seems that I should have been.

To cut a long story short, it turns out that one in six pension savers has stopped making monthly pension contributions since the recession started in 2008. Keeping the wolf from the door today, in short, has taken priority over keeping the wolf from the door in retirement.

According to the Office for National Statistics (ONS), over a million of us have suspended our monthly pension contributions, with pension contributions falling from £20.9 billion in 2008 to £18.7 billion in 2010 -- a fall of just over 10%.

Unhappy campers

The ONS blamed the recession, and tightened household budgets. Well, yes. But the comments sections in the national newspapers that covered the news told a rather different story.

Widespread dissatisfaction over pension returns, transparency, costs, retirement dates and a number of other factors were all thrown into the pot by angry and upset readers.

The simple message: Why should I put money into something that offers so uncertain a return? One 25-year old, I saw, was vowing never to pay into a pension.

Knock the providers, not the product

The reality is rather different, as that cut in pension saving of just 10% reveals. Simply put, saving into a personal pension product is still most people's best bet for a comfortable old age. As, thankfully, five in six of us still realise.

In short, there's a lot wrong with Britain's pension industry, but also a lot that's right with it. Indeed, I'd go further: avoid the worst excesses of the high-fee, low-returns crowd, and there are some pretty decent retirement-saving products out there.

Such as? Well, low-cost SIPPs from a number of providers, for instance. Or some of the low-cost stakeholders, especially when bought through a discount broker. And even equity ISAs have a role to play.

Tapping into those products will do a lot to boost eventual returns. The less you pay in costs and charges levied by middlemen, the more your pension savings can boost your retirement, and not your financial adviser's retirement.

In short, it's not rocket science.

Four steps to heaven

Nor is it difficult get advice on what to do. Boiled down to the basics, I reckon the following four-part strategy should help you towards a more comfortable retirement -- even if you're presently one of those who has stopped paying a monthly contribution.

  • Use tax shelters. SIPPs, ISAs and stakeholder pensions have their respective merits, but each offers a route to retirement that takes advantages of tax incentives to save. You could always stick the money in a regular brokerage or bank account, of course ‑‑ but a tax‑efficient stocks and shares ISA, cash ISA or SIPP is better.

  • Save regularly. Not only is putting money aside each month a useful financial discipline, it's also a perfect way to take advantage of pound cost averaging ‑‑ in effect, buying more shares when they are cheap, and buying fewer shares when they aren't. It may be tough, but it's better putting something aside, than nothing.

  • Keep costs down. High charges directly eat into your investing returns, leading to a poorer retirement. As a result, it's difficult to beat low‑cost investments held inside a low‑cost wrapper. Minimise your exposure to high‑charging investment funds ‑‑ many of which fail to beat the market ‑‑ and opt instead for individual shares or index trackers.

  • Start early, and resume if you've stopped. The sooner you start saving, the better. The longer you have for those returns to build up through compound growth -- as dividends are re‑invested to buy more shares, which in turn yield more dividends ‑‑ the bigger your retirement pot will grow. And as a gap in savings produces a shortfall in returns, keep pension 'holidays' as short as possible.

Time for action

As I've said, the above isn't rocket science. So if you're one of those people who suspended their pension-saving contributions during the recession, please do urgently think about re-starting them -- with another, better, lower-cost provider if necessary.

Doing nothing, in short, just isn't an option. I know it, and so -- I hope -- do you.

More on the markets:

Share & subscribe

Comments

The opinions expressed here are those of the individual writers and are not representative of The Motley Fool. If you spot any comments that are unsuitable hit the flag to alert our moderators.

goodlifer 10 Sep 2011 , 9:17pm

I'm an octogenarian, but I'm still pretty keen my wife children don't end up needing income support.

The best bet, it seems to me, is simply to build up a portfolio of decent, reasonably good-yield equities.

It's important to me I get this right.

If I've got it all wrong, please, please, please tell me why.

ManInTheStreet 11 Sep 2011 , 3:07am

I've heard this message so many times. And your four key points are on the ball. But what I never hear is who are good providers and who should I avoid?

Is it safe to go to an IFA -- will they put my best interests at heart, or will they just see me as a cash cow to milk?

Many people I know don't trust the pension industry. If you know there are sharks out there -- name them!

People need to know not only that it is in their best interest to save for the long term, and that message needs to be plugged frequently and loudly; they also need to be reassured that all these high charges are not being applied to them.

With no transparency you cannot tell and cannot find out for yourself. So why risk giving you money to a 'thief?'

DIYIncome 11 Sep 2011 , 8:54am

If you are reasonably financially literate, a SIPP plus an ISA is the way to go, I reckon - the two complement each other pretty well in terms of tax sheltering and flexibility of access. There are several low-cost providers.

One interesting niche in the pensions system is for non-earners (e.g. spouses or children) - you can earn an instant 25% return, as I describe here:
http://www.the-diy-income-investor.com/2011/03/instant-25-return-uk.html
However, only for a minimal amount of investment (£2880).

johnnnytemplar 11 Sep 2011 , 10:17am

There was a good article on sipps in the ft this weekend. Particularly useful is the link to the investment sense website that show the true costs for virtually all SIPP providers.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/a438fbb6-d879-11e0-8f0a-00144feabdc0.html?ftcamp=rss#axzz1XdLnFu6K

piecan 11 Sep 2011 , 10:39am

goodlifer

I don't know whether you need income now, or whether you are using your investments as life insurance. Either way I feel that putting all your eggs in one basket, especially equities, is a highly dangerous strategy. I'm sure you know that the stock market is like a rollercoaster, and there's no way of predicting where it will be when you or your family need the capital. People with a longer time to invest may think shares are their best bet but those of our vintage (I'm 73) have to think more about capital preservation.
A while ago I decided I needed a balanced portfolio of assets with low volatility but, also, reasonable prospects of growth. During my search I came across the Harry Browne Permanent Portfolio, which ticked all the right boxes for me. I don't know whether it would suit you, but it might be worth a look. Details on crawlingroad.com/blog/harry-browne-permanent-portfolio-archives/

dhorsley 11 Sep 2011 , 4:55pm

What I've done is keep paying into my final salary pension. (fully funded and in surplus by most but not all acturial calcs). However they are messing with it to my detriment and increasing the retirment age. I also pay extra into an AVC (mainly to keep out of the 40% bracket) split 60:40 between a FTSE all share fund and PRU with profits fund (which has performed well). I've then invested any spare cash (above my emergency fund) into a HYP, mostly in ISAs. Predicting how the income of my HYP has been growing suggests the income from the HYP alone should be sufficient to retire on if necessary (at a rather basic level) in 6-7years, providing I can keep paying in to the HYP. The final salary pension that would start to be claimable in a further 12 years would then add a lot of little luxuries.

goodlifer 11 Sep 2011 , 9:55pm


Many thanks, Fools, for your interesting and stimulating comments.

ManInTheStreet
"But what I never hear is who are good providers and who should I avoid?"

As far as you're concerned your only good provider is, almost certainly, you.
Avoid - or be very careful about - anyone who wants to sell you anything.

Perhaps I've just been unlucky, but my own experiences suggest that anyone who trusts either the government or the pensions industry must be out of his tiny mind.

DIYIcome,
Exactly why do you think a SIPP plus an ISA is a better bet than a sensible portfolio of equities?

Len38
"I feel that putting all your eggs in one basket, especially equities, is a highly dangerous strategy."

True, but my portfolio currently contains 28 issues.
I make that 28 baskets.

As an OAP, I suppose I'm primarily interested in income, but obviously not at the expense of losing capital.

Apart perhaps from property, do you know any safer haven for your capital than a portfolio of 15-30 blue chips?

Do you think the Harry Browne Permanent Portfolio would be any safer?
If so. why?







piecan 12 Sep 2011 , 12:31pm

Goodlifer
A portfolio of 28 blue chips is still one asset - equities. It can be likened to a one legged tightrope walker - it's unbalanced. A portfolio needs to be balanced and have wide diversity. This is why I mentioned the HBPP. It is the safest strategy I have ever come across. If you look at it's 40 years history you will see that it has only lost money in two of those years and these were very small amounts. The problem with any one asset strategy is volatility. Will your capital have lost a large part of its value when you or your family suddenly need it? Are dividends, even with blue chips, guaranteed? If HBPP is not for you, I would certainly consider a mix of income paying assets such as cash, equities, bonds & property. This would give you a much better chance of preserving your capital, which is an extremely important consideration at our time of life. Remember - you're only old once!

Phalaris 12 Sep 2011 , 1:31pm

Harry Browne's Permanent Portfolio is an ingenious creation, but perhaps better at preserving wealth than growing it.

Personally, I'd find it hard to be comfortable with 25% of my portfolio being allocated to a non-productive asset (gold).

Here's a mega-discussion about this portfolio from the Bogleheads' forum...

http://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15434&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

CanaryCoaster 12 Sep 2011 , 1:32pm

i think the first point here is that everyone's needs are different and choice should be evaluated against individual profiles. i do not have a wife and dependents and my partner is older than me and financially independent so my needs as a pensioner will be totally different to, say goodlifer and probably most of you, but hear me out! i also love my job and hope to continue working (albeit part time i hope) into my sixties and seventies if i can. i watched my parents planning their comfortable retirement just before their pension literally disappeared (well halved anyway) after the equitable life debacle (talk about all eggs in one basket - surely this is the epitome of that phrase). some years later upon discussion of pension tax breaks with my accountant he advised me (off the record) to question the value of a pension against other investments such as bricks&mortar & equities (despite the huge tax reduction i would have received paying into a pension, as a sole company director, i understood that my profits in cash would be locked up for 30years + a total loss of control without guaranteed return??????).

as a result i have chosen to pay the income tax, keep the cash in ISAs then convert that to ISA cash positions within ISA stock accounts and invest at crunch times like these. over the past month i have invested patiently, around 70% of my savings in high yield equities within the ISA framework and am keeping the remaining in cash in a high interest account but may invest further still. being priced out of the housing market as a highish income londoner due to initial lack of capital suggested to me that that bubble was unsustainable. i have also had my fingers burned in the dotcom boom but realise now that was through ignorant foolishness in buying on a whim and not doing the equity research. i would later hear friends talking about being tied to their mortgages and houses. some are in SERIOUS negative equity now after buying at the top in 2006-8. nothing except the paltry 2.8% you get from the high street bank is infallible.

i am 37. as i reach 50, 55 i am hoping that my potential for capital gain through dividend growth will be realised, and that i will be in a position to change the ratio of equity to debt (bonds, savings) so that the majority of my investments are in cash or less risky, more liquid products as at that time i will be hoping to have more capital to rely on for income. since i have (thankfully perhaps) been priced out of the housing market in london which remains remarkably bouyant still as capital markets are yoyoing, i feel this is the most sensible option, so long as i can keep close watch and rely on fools to give me advice when problems with companies occur etc. i have vowed as did the 25yo NEVER pay into a pension. i just dont trust any private company enough. that is unless i need them to live (tesco, shell, admiral are favourites at the mo thanks to what i read here). am i crazy? i certainly hope not. i find it rather insulting that i should be told over and again that i am crazy not to pension-up, given what happened to my parents, rbs, AI group etc. having worked in banking 10 years ago, and with share options which are worth significantly less than they were in 2001 at receipt, i wouldnt trust what they tell me either. it seems we need to look out for ourselves & help each other, and since most people dont have the time we must also rely on independent journalism (fools) and the wonder of the web. at least i hope so!

piecan 12 Sep 2011 , 3:12pm

phalaris

The HBPP is great at preserving capital, which is the most important thing to me. However, I also want it to grow at least in line with inflation, which it does; 9-10% compound per annum sounds good to me. Warren Buffet and his ilk may do better, but the majority of amateurs do a lot worse. Thanks for the link to bogleheads which I've never seen before. However, it has served to strengthen my belief in Harry. He believed in simplicity and people who tinker with it always make it more complicated. To check what difference their changes might make would mean having a crystal ball. Harry invested in this portfolio for more than 30 yrs and actually saw it in action. It isn't a theory which has been back tested from past information. You mentioned not being happy with 25% in gold. This is a common reaction which many people have. But it misses the point that the portfolio is a sum of its parts. It is the overall result that matters, not the individual movement of the constituents.
One last word. The fault I find with it is that it's boring. It just gets on with it. I'm not important. My only function is a bit of re-balancing, occasionally. To counter this I only invest 90% of my loot in it and throw the other 10% into anything that takes my fancy. I love seeing cash money being paid into my account, and I like to kid myself I'm the world's greatest speculator, so I go for very high returns in equities, bonds and property, with a min of 10%. Well, we all need some excitement in our lives and at 73 where else am I going to find it!

Norman44 12 Sep 2011 , 5:51pm

Does anyone know a site that compares the 'true costs' of SIPPs?

SIPPdeal sounds as if it offers a free SIPP investment service, at least at the contribution stage.

Any views?

Norman

Mud5hark 12 Sep 2011 , 5:59pm

I'm one of those million who have stopped regular saving into their pension, but the reason is very different. The tax ceiling of £50,000 pa means that my bonuses that I put into my pension would now be taxed if it all went in. So the first thing I stopped doing is putting in my regular monthly payment. So now I'm saving less than I used to but the extra £400 a month I'm getting as salary is intended for some dividend edge action (just as soon as I pay off the holiday...)

There must be more people out there that are now saving less because of the tax changes so I don't think it's just the ecession.

learnertom 12 Sep 2011 , 8:13pm

Hi Len38
The HBPP idea mentions 25% – Long Term US Treasury Bonds
25% – US Treasury Money Market Fund. How easy is it to invest in US Bonds and US Money Market Funds and is there not an exchange risk? Or would UK equivalents be a better option, if so any info on sources for Money Market Funds would be much appreciated.
Many thanks.

coolman99 12 Sep 2011 , 8:29pm

Not surprising at all

coolman99 12 Sep 2011 , 8:45pm

Pension providers milk you. Charges have consumed nearly all my increase over the last 30 years. Providers put out the 'save now' message every so often so they can milk more. They put this out as an alarm story, but there's another alarm story and that's this 'don't trust the providers, they are there to milk you with charges and don't care how the products perform because they don't need to'. By all means save and invest for your future, but whatever you do, keep well clear of greedy IFAs and insurance companies. All they want is a nice long term parasitical stream of income from your investment. Why pay 5%+ of a lifetime's saving for a couple of hours advice that could prove worthless? Or even deeply damaging in a downturn? Why put a 30 year drain on your fund in annual fees just to draw down of your own money. Why give an insurance company hundreds of thousands to keep whether you live or die? The industry is rotten to the core, fails its customers massively, but sucks in their cash and licks its lips. Well done to all who do better for themselves. So there's a tax break on pension fund growth? Growth? What's that? Better to have 60% of something than 100% of nothing.

coolman99 12 Sep 2011 , 8:45pm

Pension providers milk you. Charges have consumed nearly all my increase over the last 30 years. Providers put out the 'save now' message every so often so they can milk more. They put this out as an alarm story, but there's another alarm story and that's this 'don't trust the providers, they are there to milk you with charges and don't care how the products perform because they don't need to'. By all means save and invest for your future, but whatever you do, keep well clear of greedy IFAs and insurance companies. All they want is a nice long term parasitical stream of income from your investment. Why pay 5%+ of a lifetime's saving for a couple of hours advice that could prove worthless? Or even deeply damaging in a downturn? Why put a 30 year drain on your fund in annual fees just to draw down of your own money. Why give an insurance company hundreds of thousands to keep whether you live or die? The industry is rotten to the core, fails its customers massively, but sucks in their cash and licks its lips. Well done to all who do better for themselves. So there's a tax break on pension fund growth? Growth? What's that? Better to have 60% of something than 100% of nothing.

globally 12 Sep 2011 , 9:00pm

As an OAP I'm long past 50 so the SIPP option is apparently no longer open to me but could I invest the £2880 in, say, an annuity and what would that produce by way of income? I badly need to increase my current income due to the stupidity of investing a substantial part of my portfolio in bank shares for their yield!. The rest is history but I'm fighting back and wonder what other "Fools" would do if they were in the same position. Someone suggested an equity release scheme on my home but that eats into capital in a big way ultimately and leaves a possible problem for a widow. However, it might be the simplist solution given that one still remains the beneficial owner of the freehold property and gains from any capital appreciation during the currency of the lifetime mortgage.

hippogater 12 Sep 2011 , 9:33pm

I am surprised anyone takes on a Pension nowadays as those in power have shown both Thatcher, Brown and now Cameron, that theycan change the goal posts when ever they wish and the poor old Joe Public, has to grin and bear it.. When I wasin the RAF in Germany in 1973 we suddenly lost our overseas allowance. The Treasurey were short so they clobbered the forces. There is nothing you can do about it.
Although they look after Jack, dont they.

jackdaww 12 Sep 2011 , 9:39pm

anything is better than being controlled by the insurance/tax industries.

keep control of your money and pay the tax.

be wary of nominee share accounts - my biggest worry.

i hold 15 solid (i hope ) companies.

no pension - nobody needs a pension - we need capital and income.

NJHammer 13 Sep 2011 , 12:21am

Its common sense that you have to save for you old age. The question is what is the best way . Its no good getting tax relief on negative returns . Nobody has the definitive answer - so make your choice , get on with life and don't end up as the richest man in the graveyard .

polonium210 13 Sep 2011 , 1:56am

At 52, I have also stopped paying into my pension. I didn't get the choice - my employer decided to become my ex-employer and so I now have no income to invest.

Suggestions?

TradingChimp 13 Sep 2011 , 8:29am

The same old comments I see about saving for a pension, rip-off IFA's, expensive products etc. I am an IFA and the fact is for a higher rate tax payer you get 66.6% tax relief on any pension contributions - why would you use any other vehicle to save for your future retirement? Combined with a salary exchange mechanism this can increase to almost 100%. Regarding providers and funds, a good IFA has access to much cheaper pension contracts than the man in the street but obviously you have to be prepared to pay for the help, this will work out much cheaper than a Stakeholder in the long run. Regarding funds, trackers are fine when the market goes up but horrendous when it's in freefall, a good fund will beat a tracker 9/10 years - you pay an IFA to source a good contract at a competitive price with access to the aforementioned funds. This will more than pay for the advice in the first place in my opinion.

ScottishPound 13 Sep 2011 , 10:04am

Norman44,

Try this link for details of SIPPs:-

http://www.investmentsense.co.uk/sipp-zone/sipps/

ScottishPound 13 Sep 2011 , 10:19am

TradingChimp,

In my experience, a managed pension fund that I had for too many years did not fall as far as makets generally on a downturn, but also did not rise as far on the upturn AND had a 5% entry fee and high annual costs, so it trundled along appearring to make more money for the insurance company than for me.

Transferring it to a HL SIPP gives me more control, better transparency, better fund performance and lower costs!

TradingChimp 13 Sep 2011 , 11:01am

Scottish Pound,

I agree it gives you more control but in my experience the ability to be able to trade all the time just increases costs due to the temptation to over-trade and trying to time markets when holding a solid portfolio over the long term would probably be just as effective if not more so.

As for better fund performance - how is this possible when all the funds are available to everybody?

As for cheaper costs this is incorrect, you currently pay the full AMC on any funds you hold in a Vantage SIPP, plus an annual SIPP management fee plus dealing charges every time you trade. (Should you wish to use the SIPP to buy individual shares rather than funds this is a different proposition as an IFA does not offer this service so a SIPP may be advantageous if you feel you can choose stocks wisely but it can be very risky.)

Most competent IFA's can offer access to all funds free of initial fees (if they so choose) and the only fees would be the AMC (no dealing fees or admin fees) and would also offer an ongoing service to actively review your portfolio each year to review performance, maximise tax savings etc. Usually an IFA would charge a one-off set up fee for access to this service and then there would be no further extra charges. This set up fee is pretty irrelevant if you are investing for 20+ years. The annual admin charges and dealing fees over 20+ years on a SIPP (£200 per year fee * 20yrs = £4,000 plus a dealing charge every time you trade) and zero service would in my opinion be far more costly than an initial upfront charge to set the portfolio up and then ongoing help and advice from a professional for the next 20 years for no extra fee each year.

ScottishPound 13 Sep 2011 , 11:11am

TradingChimp,

You are making several assumptions that are simply incorrect!

I have funds in my SIPP, not individual shares, so the costs are simply the TER of the funds with no SIPP cost on top.

I do not over-trade.

I do not trade, but select funds for LTBH.

There was no initial fee for setting up



rogerthebodger 13 Sep 2011 , 11:58am

As someone who has spent the last 12 years playing with Excel, 10 in retirement, the conclusion i have come to is that a pension fund needs the tax rebate of at least 20% on contributions to come even close to providing the long term benefit that i receive from a self invested retirement pot funded entirely without help from HMRC et al. And this is in spite of the fact that my pot is lower than it would have been had it been funded via a sipp. This is not a 'hindsight' this is real life situation because i never contributed to anything other than the BSP.
Further, due to the reduction in the GAD limit on drawdown and the general drop in annuity rates, most sippers are now denied a comfortable retirement even, let alone an early one. Whereas I managed it at 56.

piecan 13 Sep 2011 , 12:56pm


learnertom

As Harry Browne was an American he was talking to Americans about investing in the USA, but recommended anyone else to put their money in their own country's securities. Unfortunately, we don't have the equivalent of their money market funds. You just have to do the best you can with cash or near cash instruments. Whilst the 25% cash element is very important, it doesn't have the volatility of the other three assets and, therefore, doesn't have the same affect on the portfolio. It is vital to keep a long gilt, equities and gold at all times and re-balance when necessary.

piecan 13 Sep 2011 , 1:00pm


globally

You didn't mention your actual age. Do you know that you can invest in a Sipp up to age 75?

Thangbrand 13 Sep 2011 , 1:21pm

goodlifer:

You might consider using some of your assets to buy a "purchased annuity" for your wife. This will diversify your income stream, and, as a "purchased annuity" part of it will be free of income tax (50% at age 65, but increasing with age at the date of purchase). Despite all that is said about insurance companies, I do not know of any insurer that has defaulted on annuities in payment. No doubt some Fool will correct me if I'm wrong.
The problem is that annuity rates are not very good at the moment, but it is likely that they will improve in a few years' time; maybe you should bear it in mind for later and keep an eye on annuity rates.

learnertom 13 Sep 2011 , 2:40pm

Thank you Len38, much appreciated.
Tom

samngail 13 Sep 2011 , 3:44pm

Reading all these comments is very interesting. I am 65 and lived and worked in Bermuda for 29 years. Towards the end of that time the Government created a compulsory Company Pension Requirement for all employers - started at 1% each employee and employer and built up to 5% each over 5 years, with the option to add more contributions by the employee - which I did as I didn't have long to retirement. When I left in 2006 to return to the UK I transferred the non-vested amount, (about $47,000) to a personal retirement plan with the same insurance co. I had thought to buy an annuity with it when I reached 65, but as the annuity rates are so poor I have just left it there for now, not sure what to do with it. Because of the Bermuda laws it must form some sort of pension payment - but I am not sure whether to leave it there, get it converted into their annuity, or whether to enquire about transferring it to a UK Insurance company, which would have to be approved by the Bermuda Government, and it would presumably become taxable. I realise that $53,000 is not much in the scale of your usual investors, (and that it is going up and down as I write this, although in a conservative profile - because I hate risk!) Look forward to any helpful comments from the Fools out there & thanks in advance!

dukindiva 13 Sep 2011 , 10:14pm

I think Lens38 is spot on about not putting all your eggs in one asset class, in fact I would go further and say that even large cap dividend shares can be better diversified by mixing in some mid & small cap shares (although if time isn't on your side, I'm beginning to doubt that).

Coolman99 is also right (imho) to think that IFO's & providers are rip off merchants by and large. My thought is that the majority are and its worth the legwork to find the least greedy ones.

Finally I would suggest that the big financial institutions
have too much clout these days and can manipulate the market much more than those with less to gain (private investors) would care to believe.
I read recently that the same size pension pot would give a Dutchman a better return than a Brit in their respective countries ... its high time people started looking outside the UK for annuity providers!!

goodlifer 14 Sep 2011 , 12:09am

Len38
"A portfolio of 28 blue chips is still one asset - equities. It can be likened to a one legged tightrope walker."

What kind of an argument is that?
Circus tricks aren't really my cup of tea, but why shouldn't a one-legged tightrope walker lead as happy and successful life as you or me, provided he/she manages to accept his/her limitations and play his/her cards reasonably carefully?

Didn't the one-legged Heather Mills dance better on ice than probably you and certainly me?

And what about the one-eyed?
There've been several one-eyed batsmen in first class cricket.
What about Wiley Post, the first man to fly solo round the world?
Long, long ago my flight commander was one-eyed.
He was also a reasonably competent racing driver, and became a production test pilot on jet fighters.

"Will your capital have lost a large part of its value when you or your family suddenly need it?"

I doubt it.
My portfolio's paper value is currently about 5% down on what I've paid for it, and I doubt if it will go down much further.
It's a dreadful thing to say, but I can't help hoping it does - it would certainly suit my book.
Why?
Because I currently reinvest all my dividends, and the lower footsie drops the more shares, hence the more dividends, I get for my money.

Anyway, why would I want to realise my capital?
My time-horizon is ten years plus - though I'm in my eighties, my wife, and.of course my children, are all that much younger.
My idea is to help them all enjoy some sort of reasonable comfort when they get too old to work - in other words, a decent INCOME,.

To cope with immediate, uninsured disasters one needs a lifeboat fund; not that much ,when you get to my age - I only work part-time now, so even loss of earnings would be something I could live with.

Thangbrand,

"You might consider using some of your assets to buy a "purchased annuity" for your wife."
Yes, I've' considered it.
Why don't I do it?
Because, as you seem to realise, the rates are lousy.
Why do you think they're ever going to get any better?



piecan 14 Sep 2011 , 12:15pm


Goodlifer

I wrote - "It (your portfolio) can be likened to a one-legged tightrope walker - it's unbalanced." You just happened to omit the last two words which completely altered it's meaning. As for the rest, I couldn't believe the drivel you wrote. Octogenarian? I'd say more like an eight year old.
You didn't reveal your true colours when you were pleading in your OP:
"It's imperative to me I get this right."
"If I've got it all wrong, please, please, please, tell me why."
Someone like you makes me wonder why I bother. The answer must lie in the fact that they don't come along too often, thank God.

goodlifer 14 Sep 2011 , 12:25pm

Canary Coaster
"Upon discussion of pension tax breaks with my accountant he advised me (off the record) to question the value of a pension against other investments such as bricks&mortar & equities... (despite the huge tax reduction i would have received paying into a pension i understood that my profits in cash would be locked up for 30years + a total loss of control without guaranteed return??????)"

I'll drink to that.

goodlifer 14 Sep 2011 , 12:36pm

Thank you, Len38

Sorry about omitting "it's unbalanced."
It's because I thought "unbalanced" is just what a one-legged tightrope
walker can't afford to be.
Apologies for the misunderstanding.

goodlifer 19 Sep 2011 , 6:57pm

Hi Len38,

One of those extraordinary coincidences:
Just had a card saying,
"It's never too late to enjoy a happy childhood."

Thangbrand 20 Sep 2011 , 6:46pm

goodlifer: Why do i think annuity rates will get better?

The Office of Budget Responsibility reckons that 10-year gilts will be yielding 4.9% in five years' time. This could represent a 30% increase in annuity rates.

goodlifer 21 Sep 2011 , 9:42pm

Thank you Thangbrand,

I'm still a little bit dubious.
What's their forecasting record like?
Did they forecast the credit crunch?

What do they think's going to happen in October?

Join the conversation

Please take note - some tags have changed.

Line breaks are converted automatically.

You may use the following tags in your post: [b]bolded text[/b], [i]italicised text[/i]. All other tags will be removed from your post.

If you want to add a link, please ensure you type it as http://www.fool.co.uk as opposed to www.fool.co.uk.

Hello stranger

To add your own comment, please login.

Not yet registered? Register now.