Dartboard investing only works when you stand inches away

Dartboard Investing

Those ancient Mayans had one messed-up clock

 

Every day, people miss out on great investments because they don’t know how to quantify risk vs. return. You need written investment criteria.  Here’s a sample.

If you don’t have the energy to click the link, it’s mostly a series of questions that read something like this:

What type of investment is it?
Real estate.

This is a straightforward question with a clear answer. Knowing what classification the investment falls into tells you how liquid it is and how much its value might fluctuate. If the investment were a stock it’d be easy to sell, though not necessarily for a premium. A plot of dirt, improved or raw, has tangible value. But selling it, even in a seller’s market, can burn a lot of hours.

If I bite, how will this affect my allocation?
Negligible.

You don’t necessarily want your eggs in a million baskets, nor in one, but you do need to know how many they’re in. And if the breakdown among the baskets gets out of proportion, you want to know that, too. Say your portfolio starts out with 33% in growth stocks, 33% in long-term notes and 33% in real estate. Six months later, if the percentages have changed to 5, 34 and 61, you’ll want to rearrange to keep things in balance (or ride the 61% component if so inclined.)

But what if this transaction did affect allocation? What would you do to balance the imbalance? You could sell an asset, buy other assets, or decide you’re going to live with a different breakdown.

What do you estimate the return will be?
4½–8%, plus however much the property appreciates, which we estimate will be nothing for the next 3-5 years.

We keep score when building wealth. Amazingly, some people haven’t figured this out yet or refuse to acknowledge it. If you think investing has an emotional component, and that either being a nice person or playing hunches is part of the game, please stop reading Control Your Cash and find something less demanding. Seriously. See, we said “please”. Didn’t hurt your feelings or anything. You should be happy.

What exactly is the investment?
A 2
nd floor, 1-bedroom/1-bath 770 ft2 condo in an above-average part of town. The condo’s listed at $50,000 and approved for a short sale*.

Meanwhile, nearby condos rent for $650-750 a month.  Estimated annual expenses read like this. (This is something called an annual property operating data worksheet. Download it at your leisure.)

The above question is self-explanatory, right? And its relevance should be self-evident. If it isn’t, return to kindergarten and start over. We’ll be waiting.

———-

Anyhow, this investment allows for multiple variables that affect ROI (that’s return on investment, in case you forgot.) Variables include things like rents, and whether you can buy the property as owner-occupied, which means you should be able to get a cheaper loan with lower closing costs. Here’s what we mean:

There are two primary ways to buy this condo as an investment if you have neither the cash up front nor excellent credit. Find a partner, or incorporate.

1. Find a partner (a joint venture.)

An investor lends you $50,000 interest-free to complete the sale. You buy the house and live in it.

Nothing’s free, of course. Under this form of owner occupancy, you pay the investor 70% of the house’s net operating income (i.e., the rent.) Another 10% of the rent goes into a reserve maintenance account – out of which you pay for things like appliance repair. Which you shouldn’t need to if you have a home warranty. But there’ll always be some unexpected expense that a warranty won’t cover: stucco repair, interior paint, etc.

What about the remaining 20% of the rent? That’s yours to keep. Yes, under this arrangement you pay only 80% of fair-market rent. On the other hand, doing it this way you can’t write off your expenses on your tax return.

Who would work out a scheme like this? Lots of people. It’s a perfect vehicle for a father who wants to help his kid buy a home and still earn a return.

Or

2. Form a limited liability company (details here, here, here, and here.)

You and the person who’s lending you money are partners in the LLC, which becomes the official and legal owner of the property. Once you create the LLC and it takes ownership of the property, it’s the sole owner: nobody and nothing else. It’s not as if you own x% of the property and your partner owns 100-x%. The LLC owns it all. You own a particular share of the LLC, but that’s a different issue.

Each LLC has an operating agreement that lays out the details of the deal: such as who gets to write expenses off, how you’ll split profits when you sell the property, and specific duties for each partner. The LLC also protects you from unlimited liability in case a tenant or a visitor decides to sue. They can sue for $1 trillion if they want, and even have a case, but they can’t get more than your investment in the LLC.

With this example, the investor again lends you $50,000 interest-free. You find a tenant, charge her the going rate and again keep 10% in a maintenance account.

This scheme works for partners with disparate skills – e.g. one partner with the time and expertise to find the property (in this example, you) and the other with most of the money.

What’s the downside?

Property values could drop even further, meaning you might need years just to break even. If the property doesn’t rent immediately, your return will decline.

The renter might damage the property. This is why you qualify prospective tenants and collect a security deposit. If you really want to avoid headaches, spend 10% of the rent on a property manager. If you value your time at all, hiring a property manager will pay for itself quickly.

You and your partner might disagree on how to manage the place and, when it comes time, how to sell it. You solve this with an operating agreement, one that looks something like this:

That’s pretty much it. Just make sure that every conceivable subject of potential dispute finds its way into the operating agreement, and that you register your LLC in a state that’s business-friendly. That usually means Delaware or Nevada. Or failing that, your home state. (You can live and operate in, say, North Dakota but register in Maine if you want. It’s totally legal.) Just don’t register in California, and never New York: their LLCs don’t protect you enough.

The old pessimistic saw says you have to have money to make money. That’s not true if you leverage someone else’s.

*Selling a house short means begging the lender’s representatives to take less than they originally agreed to, on the theory that a wounded bird in the hand is worth more than a potentially rabid pair in the bush. Details here.

**This post is featured in the 1/4/11 edition of the real estate investing carnival**

**This post is also featured in the Carnival of the Road to Financial Independence**

Reuse, recycle. (Already reduced)

Neptune

Neptune. Stayed undiscovered for centuries, has no people. Now THAT's a smarter planet.

This post ran on Free From Broke back in June. Let’s see how prescient it looks today.

Why do people get excited when their favorite retailer holds a sale, but not when Wall Street does?

Let’s start with the obligatory disclaimer – this is not an encouragement nor a discouragement to buy or sell particular securities, stocks carry risk, consult a financial advisor but you don’t have to, etc.  That was for that infinitesimally small segment of the population that is a) literate enough to read this post, yet b) dumb enough to do whatever a disembodied online voice suggests.  There, now you can read the post absolved of any obligation to think.

Most investors know, in theory, that it’s foolish to buy at the top of the market and sell at the bottom. (Of course, human nature means that the opposite is true in practice – otherwise the top and bottom wouldn’t be where they are.)  But it’s equally foolish to assume that the market will carry you along indefinitely if you just buy a flat representation of it and don’t research at all.  We have 12+ years of real-world evidence of that.  Factoring in inflation, the Dow has risen by an average of .4% annually since February of 1997.  Your index fund would have been better off if it had collected tin cans since the Packers last won a Super Bowl. (1.3% annually now. The Packers are 8-to-1 to win the Super Bowl.)

There is such a thing as overdiversification. You might find stability in a comprehensive index fund, but it’s impossible to find any significant value.  Buying a basket of Dow stocks, or something similar like a Wilshire 5000 index fund, will likely give fantastic returns over an 80-year period.  If you plan on not waiting until you’re 115 years old to enjoy your money, there are more targeted ways to go about attempting to build wealth in the stock market.

Instead, look at companies that are temporarily wounded, i.e. whose stock sells at a discount. Earlier this year, when the global CEO of Toyota (NYSE: TM) was being grilled on Capitol Hill for selling cars to people who confused the brake with the accelerator, the company’s stock sank.  But some fleeting bad PR can’t negate a decades-long reputation for value and quality.  A few weeks after our demonstrative congressmen and senators finally pulled the curtain on their combination political theater/witch trial, Toyota stock had quietly gained 15%.

Around the time Toyota emerged from a bruising at the unfair hands of public opinion, British Petroleum (NYSE: BP) made Toyota’s problems look trivial.  BP traded at $60.48 the day the Deepwater Horizon spill began.  Today it’s at $36.52, a 60% drop.  (And now it’s at 42.81, an annualized 37% return from when we recommended buying. Why are we not giving stock tips professionally? Oh, right, the licensing exams.) The rig’s manufacturer, Transocean (NYSE: RIG), has fallen from $92.03 to $50.04 over the same period, a 46% decline.  (And today it’s at 70.93, an annualized 101% return. AHEM.) Fortunately for Transocean, it’s in an industry with few players.  Also, most people had barely heard of it since it doesn’t sell directly to the public.  (When was the last time you bought an oil rig?)  This distinguishes Transocean from BP, which plasters its logo everywhere and goes out of its way to embed itself in the public consciousness.  Thanks to that insistence, almost everyone identifies the Gulf of Mexico spill with BP more than they do Transocean.

Both BP and Transocean have otherwise healthy financials that can normally withstand a one-time event. Then again, Deepwater Horizon is some event.  But a wounded company isn’t a doomed company: despite the Exxon Valdez disaster, ExxonMobil went from pariah to the world’s most profitable company in just a few years.  Johnson & Johnson rebounded after the Tylenol scare of 1982 and came back stronger than ever.  There are several ways to murder a company along with its stock: obsolescence (Atari), poor economics (General Motors) and rampant crime (Enron) are three of the most efficient.  But for a temporarily disabled company with a history of success and goodwill (in the general sense, not the accounting sense)?  A resurgence is more likely than you think.  Don’t confuse a broken bone with a bullet wound through the cranium.

One more time: there’s always value somewhere in the stock market, but very rarely can you make money simply by buying into the market as a whole.  In fact, the times when the market (as a whole) rises fastest are when the gains are most dubious and tentative – case in point, the dot-com bubble and ensuing crash.  More accurately, there’s always value in the stock market among particular entrants.  Finding the ones whose stock prices have suffered for no better reason than that of public perception is as wise a place as any to start.

Apropos of nothing, Walmart might be looking at a sexual discrimination suit with 1.4 million plaintiffs this week. The stock lost $47 million in market capitalization in one trading day this week. A good time to sell? Start this post again at the beginning.

Even playing with the house’s money isn’t enough

Bum on a bench

The only thing more pathetic than a horse player? A dog player.

If you don’t know anything about sports, read this instead. Or try and slog through today’s post. If you want the conclusion first, today’s moral is that gambling remains a moron’s pursuit.

——————-

Not only can you not consistently win gambling, you can barely win if the house pays for your bets.

A Control Your Cash acquaintance (we’d use the generic pseudonym “Bob”, except that’s his real name, so let’s call him “Stu”) recently found himself in possession of the kind of thing most gamblers only dream about – a free, hot ticket. Here’s the story.

Bob Stu likes to gamble on sports occasionally. (Whatever, we don’t hold it against him.) You might not know this, but the IRS lets you deduct gambling losses up to a certain amount. We don’t mention that in the book, because you shouldn’t be gambling anyway. When most gamblers lose a bet in the race & sports books in Las Vegas, they discard their tickets, not realizing that they count as effective receipts and proof of loss. It’s fairly common for enterprising gamblers to scour the aisles looking for discarded tickets written for large enough amounts. Stu isn’t above this.

One weekday afternoon during the NFL preseason, Stu thought he’d hit the jackpot, so to speak. He found a perfectly preserved $100 ticket that would make a great addition to his tax return.

On closer inspection, it turned out to be three neatly folded $100 tickets, each for the same wager.

On still closer inspection, the wager turned out to be live. Each ticket was a 10-1 bet on the Baltimore Ravens to win the Super Bowl, written hours earlier. Some schlimazel up and lost his tickets.

Stu, being the honest guy he is, returned to the book the next day and spoke with the manager. He explained the situation, slightly tempering it. (“I found a $100 ticket…”) As Stu acknowledges, “I wasn’t going to admit to having all 3. I’m not that honest.” The manager, shocked that a customer was asking him for anything other than a light, said that unless the buyer had taken the extremely unlikely precaution of writing down the ticket’s 15-digit serial number, there was nothing he, the manager, could do. The ticket and its siblings were Stu’s.

So there it was – a potential $3000, just for being in the right place at the right time.

But also a potential $0. After all, the Ravens, like any other given team, probably won’t win the Super Bowl. So how to maximize Stu’s return?

Hedging. If you’re only vaguely familiar with the term, it means forgoing the possibility of a particular payout for the greater possibility (or better yet, the certainty) of a smaller one.

Say Stu had found the tickets the week before the Super Bowl, and the Ravens happened to be playing in it. To hedge optimally, Stu would wager enough money on the other team to guarantee him the same payout regardless of who wins. Formula coming henceforth. Formula contains one addition and one division, two operations you hopefully mastered by the 4th grade.

But Stu found the tickets during the preseason. Although the oddsmakers expected the Ravens to have a good year, giving them 10-1 odds to win a 32-team league, there’s no guarantee the Ravens would even make the playoffs. Baltimore is leading the AFC North at 8-3 and looking as good as anyone expected in a tight division, in a tight conference, in a tight league.

But had T.J. Houshmandzadeh dropped on 18-yard touchdown pass with 32 seconds remaining against Pittsburgh on October 3, and Ray Lewis not recovered a fumble 3 weeks later in overtime against Buffalo, Baltimore would likely be on the outside looking in at the playoff picture.

Say Stu had advance knowledge that the Ravens would miss the playoffs. Could he have hedged enough money to guarantee himself a payout?

No. It’s unlikely any offshore wagering site offered a proposition on something as esoteric as the Ravens missing the playoffs, but if one did, it would likely set the odds around 2-5 (given that Baltimore was 10-1 to win the whole thing). That’d be a 40% return on Stu’s money, but then what if the Ravens do make the playoffs, which the oddsmakers say they probably will? Now Stu’s out the price of his hedge bet, and still needs to have multiple playoff games break the right way. After all, Stu’s ticket wasn’t for the Ravens to simply get invited to the pageant, but to win the talent and swimsuit competitions too. Stu would have to hedge every playoff game the Ravens are alive for, approximately doubling his bet and thus halving his potential return every time.

What if the midsummer genie said “the Ravens will make it to the Super Bowl” without specifying who’d win? Which is a pretty bold proclamation for a genie to make. Yet now, at least, we can get this down to exactly one hedge bet. But for how much?

Say Atlanta represents the NFC. The smart thing would be to place a bet on Atlanta costing
$3300/(m+1)

where m is the odds on Atlanta. Stu’s payout would be
$3300m/(m+1).

We use $3300 because that’s what Stu would pocket if his original tickets all came in: $1000 on each of three $100 10-1 tickets, plus the original $100 that the anonymous poor sucker spent on each.

Let’s say after Atlanta wins the conference, the odds on them to win the Super Bowl are 5-11. Stu would bet $2143.75 on them, guaranteeing himself $1156.25. If Atlanta paid even money, he’d wager $1650 to guarantee himself $1650. If Atlanta was an 11-5 underdog, Stu would wager $1031.25 to guarantee himself $2268.75. The better Baltimore does this year – the bigger a favorite they are – the better it is for Stu.

But this is the Super Bowl, and neither team is likely to be as big a favorite as 5-11 nor as long an underdog as 11-5. The game is supposed to be between somewhat evenly matched teams.

What if the genie said “the Ravens will make it to the conference championship”? That’s still a valuable thing for a gambler to know going into the season, or so you’d think.

By the time we get to the NFL’s round of 4, Stu could truly hedge his Super Bowl bet only by wagering on the 3 remaining teams. Which, on average, would probably each pay around 3-to-1. Or could pay a lot worse. So if he took them all, covering every outcome, Stu would be winning close to even money.  But again, he’d still have to risk a ton to keep his original, “free” bets live.

Working backward yet another step, even when there are still 8 teams alive, Stu couldn’t hedge himself more than a few bucks. Every time the number of participants increases, the number of possible outcomes does too. Double them, and you again halve (or close to it, depending on odds) Stu’s potential payout. Were the genie to guarantee Stu that the Ravens would make the playoffs, he still couldn’t make any money.

And that’s with the benefit of a nonexistent genie. Even a free 10-1 wager can’t be manipulated into a bet that guarantees anything more than a tiny sum.

If free gambling isn’t worth the effort, think about how useless it is to pay for the privilege.

**This post is featured in the Carnival of Wealth #15**