"Sadly I think any portfolio manager is always going to love your nest egg somewhat less than your own self,"
@justinp,
Not too sure that always holds true.
The way one can circumvent that issue by giving one's money to investment managers who invest the majority of their own personal capital alongside yours. That invariably the case for small, boutique funds.
(But of course, then one needs to contend with the key person risk, but the way to get round that is to adopt a fund-of-funds approach i.e., just like a diverse portfolio stocks reduces stock-specific risk, so too does a portfolio of managers reduce single-manager risk.)
"I'm also curious btw if there are any analysts whose writings you particularly respect, either here on HC or elsewhere? "
I'm afraid not really going to be useful to you in this regard because I tend to not actively seek out other opinions, preferring to come to a view on stocks independently, on my own.
Also, more and more of my reading is recreational these days so I'm a bit out of touch with commentary these days. But then again, I've never "followed" the writings of anyone in particular; mostly ad hoc when I stumble across their work inadvertently.
For what it's worth, I follow Klogg, noomxx, peterdoobes, Jimmy_C, and friendlydwarves, but even then its only very infrequently when I encounter them commenting on a stock in which I'm already participating. And my sense is that they aren't overly frequent posters.
I used to subscribe to Intelligent Investor for a few years because I think they do (did) some decent-quality independent research on companies, but that subscription has lapsed.
I subscribe to a US based commentator called Doomberg, but that's not directly stock market related (written by a someone who is clearly an independent thinker, it contains what I consider to be unique and differentiated assessments of several of aspects of our world - notably energy.)
"I was wondering how much TeamInvest wanted to charge you to join? My own attitude is that if I just get one good idea from a source every year or two then that should pay for the subscription many times over."
It would have been about a decade ago that my curiosity made me pop into one of their introductory sessions, so I can't remember the exact amount, but I know it was several thousands of dollars,.. maybe $5,000 for an annual subscription? But don't hold me to that exact amount.
As for being sourcing good ideas, I think there are a number of places to do so where you don't have to fork out thousands of dollars.
At the risk of sounding obtuse, I've always found the notion of "looking for stock ideas" to be a strange one because my way of thinking has always been, once I'm up to speed on say 100 investment-grade companies (and that might take a few years to get to that level of operating knowledge), then that becomes the best idea pool possible.
All I need to do is to keep abreast of them, have a sense of their intrinsic value and then buy them when the market prices them - for whatever reason - below that intrinsic value.
My experience has been that, at any given point in time, at least a few of that universe of stocks are below my assessment of fundamental value. The times when this isn't the case are rare.
For example, two years ago, it was the energy sector that stood out as bargain buying.
In the middle of last year, long-duration growth (CAR, REA, TNE) got sold off due to interest rate jitters.
And in the intervening periods there were indiscriminate sell-downs - for a variety of reasons - at various points in time in specific stocks I own, such as AUB, DDR, GUD, KOV, LYL, NCK, NTD, SNL, VUK.
Currently I see the healthcare stocks, CSL RMD and SHL all looking attractive.
So does AMC (but it is due downgrade so tactically still too early to buy).
As I say, there is almost always something that looks worthy of buying.
While there are many participants in the stock market that make it look complicated, it is really not a difficult game:
1. Know 100 companies and their business models
2. Derive fundamental valuations for those 100 companies
3. Wait and watch
4. When any of those companies fall below your derived valuations, BUY them.
I know this sounds flippant and I recognise that there is a lot of work involved in Steps 1 and 2
,
