Boghies Account Talk

[Frixxxx]

Re: Cashy Account Behaving Bondy with No Risk

I hear the Crowley gallery ships to your door!

 

[coolhand]

Merry Christmas everybody...

Got a weird question. Where does someone look to find decent art (paintings) for one's abode? This - to me - is as confusing as technical trading strategies

I bought a painting from Tom a few years back. Somehow he managed to have one that depicted a seascape out in Utah, which is what I was looking for.

 

[Boghie]

For some reason I no longer have an account that can PM. Is that a charge feature. Maybe I'll get me a Christmas present...

 

[nasa1974]

For some reason I no longer have an account that can PM. Is that a charge feature. Maybe I'll get me a Christmas present...

You should be able to PM. I'll let Tom know.

 

[Boghie]

You should be able to PM. I'll let Tom know.

I was able to reply to Frixxxx. I normally use the main menu option of 'Forum | Community | Member List' to get my 'To:' Line. That page is restricted.

 

[alevin]

Interesting. I haven't used the community member list in awhile myself. It's restricted now for me too. Not sure what that's about. Tom ahoy!

 

[burrocrat]

Merry Christmas everybody...

Got a weird question. Where does someone look to find decent art (paintings) for one's abode? This - to me - is as confusing as technical trading strategies

also pm alevin, she knows where to get some cool realistic landscapes straight from the artist.

 

[gronk007]

Art galleries in Santa Fe are pretty awesome...

 

[99percent]

The Louvre. Heard some good things.

 

[Boghie]

Awesome chaps - even the 99%er. Funny...

Anyway - believing I'm in the 1% (but actually knowing I'm in the 15%) I decided to go a bit upstream in the clothing department. The last set of work clothes I purchased (dress shirts and slacks because I am an office slug) cost me a pretty penny and lasted about 16 months. So I google queried for dress shirt quality durability and fit (can't really remember the words, but that is close).

The best I found was: Joshua Kennon - Thoughts of Business, Politics & Life from a Private Investor. 'Dress Shirts for Men 101'
He linked to: Proper Cloth - Dress Shirt Fabrics, Shirting Fabrics
And, he provides links to amazing vendors which proved incredibly valuable.

Now, those of you who have had to suffer me drooling eggs on my pants (Frixxxx and CH) probably noted that I am not a Fashion Queen. None of you have seen me guest appear on any interior decorating shows - I promise!!! But, I hate spending money on stuff that doesn't last. And, with Quicken I quickly determined that the last stuff I bought really lasted less than a year. I know I wash it myself and probably with the harshest chemicals known by man - instantly killing off the ocean in bucolic San Diego. That probably isn't very good, but one year. I also know that a good friend of mine gave me some shirts (albeit with the tags removed) that lasted for years and looked good till the salsa lathered eggs slopped on them. So I had some concept of quality.

Back to Kennon's 'Dress Shirts for Men 101.... It proved eye opening. I now know why my sleeves are too long or too short. I'm a 34, shirts sold at department stores are 32/33 or 34/35. I now know why they loose their form, color, bind as I move, etc.. I now have some understanding of fabrics and have some idea of what I want and think I want. But, am I ready to make the following comment:

My rule of thumb: If you are willing to invest a little bit of money into your wardrobe, you should never pay more than $250 for an off-the-rack shirt, and even that is pushing it. Beyond that price, if you are intelligent about your purchasing, you can get a much higher quality made-to-measure or bespoke shirt in the fabric of your choice, personalized down to the cuff style, collar style, and cut (“fit”) by a great shirting house.

Uh nope, Joshua. I don't think I am about to pay $250 for an off the rack shirt. Not even a mere $200. But, insane stuffyness of a Private Investor aside, I very much enjoyed the article and found it incredibly valuable. Especially regarding types of fabric, types of shirt fitting, and an amazing list of vendors. And, to me it looked as if the list was ordered from extremely high end to very very good. Me thinks Joshua hasn't been in the store where I bought my stuff for decades. So I started poking from the bottom where my gubmint salary lands me. Brooks Brothers, Charles Tyrwhitt and maybe Ede & Ravenscroft it is. Rackmount to measure it is. Broadcloth, Dobby, Pinpoint, and Twill it is.

Big sales at Brooks Bothers and a desire to see the stuff in person got me to their store. And, now I am all dressed up with stuff that feels substantial, fits well, and will repel salsa covered eggs like a 1%ers waiving off a 99%er trying to 'wash' his limousine's windshield.

 

[Frixxxx]

...

Now, those of you who have had to suffer me drooling eggs on my pants (Frixxxx and CH) probably noted that I am not a Fashion Queen.

You use fork real good!:toung:

 

[Handballer]

When I was on the job, I shopped at Costco for my fine clothing.

 

[Boghie]

When I was on the job, I shopped at Costco for my fine clothing.

Handballer, I am working on being snooty - just give me time.
You will know I have arrived at 'Private Investor Snootyness' when I demure about a poorly fit BeSpoke Shirt.

But for right now, I will compare this year's Christmas specials from the Department Store I frequented till a couple of days ago with that of the two Snooty Brooks Brothers entities I padded my way into a couple of days ago.

Department Store:

Dress Shirts (No Iron, Slim Fit):

Calvin Klein (which is probably high quality): $55
Eagle: $42
Van Heusen (what I bought): $23​

Dress Pants (Slim Fit):

Calvin Klein (which is probably high quality): $80
Kenneth Cole: $45​

Brooks Brothers Factory Outlet:

Dress Shirts (No Iron, Slim Fit): $35
Dress Pants: $32​

Brooks Brothers Retail:

Dress Shirts (No Iron, Slim Fit): $51
Dress Pants: $57​

Now, for an initial review.
I purchased the Van Heusen's in April 2012. The colors faded noticeably by February of this year. The colors and buttons are in the process of blowing out. And the stitching is bunched up. Based on my purchasing history I can guess that these shirts survive a year till I start getting embarrassed wearing them. And, they are still too long or too short in the sleeve. I was paying off my credit card debt and I absolutely hate to shop so I suffered more time in those threads.
The Kenneth Cole slacks looked great but the stitching and fasteners blew out even earlier than those of the shirts. I have been throwing them away and tucking in the tabs for the last six months. Basically, they were serviceable for less than 10 months. My ancient stuff is still around.
End result, $410 lasted me 12 months for four shirts and three pair of pants (I think).

I spent close to $740 on seven shirts and three pair of pants and eight ties (that is where they made their money on me:embarrest. Four of the shirts and two of the pants were from the Factory Outlet. The shirts seem to be a different fabric than the retail, but of comparable quality and fit. The pants seem to be a bit inferior to that of the retail store. Time will tell. But all of them fit much better right off the rack. I neither 'bespoked' nor 'made to measured' them - just picked em right off the rack. I think the Outlet Store's 34/35 is really a 34 while the Van Heusen's were 35's. Both the outlet (34/35) and retail stores (34) are the same sleeve length.

In the end, the outlet store cost me $204 for 4 shirts and two slacks. Bring that up to $236 with another pair of slacks. The Department store cost me $235. For $1 I got a significantly better fit. We shall see on the quality but the fabric is thicker and the stitching is better and the buttons are sewed on with gusto. My guess is that these are three year shirts and two year pants, but we shall see!!! If I get 2 more days of wear out of these items I am ahead of the game.

The retail store cost me $237 for 3 shirts and one pair of slacks. Bring that up to $351 with two more pair of slacks. The Department store cost me $235. For $116 I again got a significantly better fit. The shirt fabric is a very true broadcloth and is substantial. The pants are made significantly better than the Kenneth Cole's and much better than those of the outlet store. My guess is that these are three year shirts and three year pants. If I get 110 days of more wear out of these items I am ahead of the game.

Finally, surfing the web kinda points to the retail stuff lasting 5 years. Can't tell yet because I haven't owned them for any duration. And, don't forget that there is a value with not having to shop. I hate shopping.

Special Note: Brooks Brothers has huge sales twice a year. I think I could only afford their stuff on the proletariate sale days. Be forwarned.

So, am I being a total snoot or just being prudent. Only time will tell...

 

[Boghie]

Starting to look at the 'I Fund', but it seems rather bubbly as well.
It is, however, less bubbly than the C/S.
And, the 'F Fund' is correcting.

Too bad we do not have access to an emerging market fund, a REIT, some sector funds, or precious metals and commodities. Kinda feel locked in...

 

[99percent]

Or some growth funds.

 

[OBGibby]

Starting to look at the 'I Fund',.....

I Fund interests me, too. Not sure if that is because it has lagged S/C of late, or Birch's love for it. The next move I make regarding C/S/I may be one that I increase I to 40 or 50% (currently only have 25% in I).

 

[Boghie]

Pseudoscience

So, here goes a bit of steaming. Dang if it ain't in public...

Ten years ago, on January 2 2004 our funds stood at:

Fund	Average Return	2004 Value	Expected 2013 Value	Current Value	Delta	Delta %
F	6%	$9.94	$17.80	$15.76	$2.04	12.94%
C	10%	$11.61	$30.11	$23.66	$6.45	27.26%
S	11%	$12.50	$35.49	$33.45	$2.04	6.1%
I	11%	$12.99	$36.88	$25.33	$11.55	45.60%

We obviously have had a hard time crawling out of 2008, but crawl we have. The annual growth numbers are from Quicken (actually Newport Group) and ARE NOT inflation adjusted like they are presented in Quicken's Asset Allocation Guide. I did not use the inflation adjusted growth rates because I wanted to see the end results in today's dollars - and, because we are used to seeing non-adjusted rates. For example, we always see the S&P500 long term annual growth rate as about 10%, but inflation adjusted it becomes about 7%.

So, where does that leave us. Based on my Pseudoscience SWAG I believe the 'I Fund' is the place to be with a little stability provided by the 'C Fund'. Run from the S and F Funds. Run from the 'S Fund' because it is nearing its norms and run from the 'F Fund' because it has been market adjusted by the FED. So, an aggressive allocation would be BirchTree's. Not quite there for me, but over-allocating into the 'I Fund' seems to be in my future...

This is the purest form of pseudoscience but it is all I got.

 

[OBGibby]

Re: Pseudoscience

So, here goes a bit of steaming. Dang if it ain't in public...

Ten years ago, on January 2 2004 our funds stood at:

Fund	Average Return	2004 Value	Expected 2013 Value	Current Value	Delta	Delta %
F	6%	$9.94	$17.80	$15.76	$2.04	12.94%
C	10%	$11.61	$30.11	$23.66	$6.45	27.26%
S	11%	$12.50	$35.49	$33.45	$2.04	6.1%
I	11%	$12.99	$36.88	$25.33	$11.55	45.60%

We obviously have had a hard time crawling out of 2008, but crawl we have. The annual growth numbers are from Quicken (actually Newport Group) and ARE NOT inflation adjusted like they are presented in Quicken's Asset Allocation Guide. I did not use the inflation adjusted growth rates because I wanted to see the end results in today's dollars - and, because we are used to seeing non-adjusted rates. For example, we always see the S&P500 long term annual growth rate as about 10%, but inflation adjusted it becomes about 7%.

So, where does that leave us. Based on my Pseudoscience SWAG I believe the 'I Fund' is the place to be with a little stability provided by the 'C Fund'. Run from the S and F Funds. Run from the 'S Fund' because it is nearing its norms and run from the 'F Fund' because it has been market adjusted by the FED. So, an aggressive allocation would be BirchTree's. Not quite there for me, but over-allocating into the 'I Fund' seems to be in my future...

This is the purest form of pseudoscience but it is all I got.

Question regarding the average return column. Were the 6%, 10%, and 11%/11% figures what the average return had been up to 2004, or do those include 2005-present?

 

[Boghie]

Re: Pseudoscience

Question regarding the average return column. Were the 6%, 10%, and 11%/11% figures what the average return had been up to 2004, or do those include 2005-present?

OBGibby, the asset classes I use (and map to our funds) come from Quicken via Newport Group. There are defined as follows:

G Fund: Average return on a universe of Money Market funds (understates our growth rate substancially)
F Fund: Barclays Capital Aggregate Bond Index (sorry about edit, this Quicken asset group category is dead on)
C Fund: S&P 500 Index since 1957
S Fund: DFA 6-8 Small Cap Index since 1957 (also listed as those stocks not in the S&P 500)
I Fund: Morgan Stanley EAFE Index since 1970

Some of these asset groups are spot on, however the G & F are probably off - but suitable. The 'DFA 6-9 Small Cap Index' is comprised of stocks with a capitalization less than the S&P 500. Thus, it should be those stocks that are not in the S&P 500 - thus our S Fund.

Using the MoneyChimp CAGR calculator and the dates noted above I determined that Newport Group was using inflation adjusted rates.

The numbers are up to date. They include everything from the dates stated. They seem to update frequently on download - but the changes are small.

Kinda a mess, and a mess in progress, but...

Pseudoscience

 

[OBGibby]

Re: Pseudoscience

Got it, thanks.