DISQUS

Thanks for the recommendation! I'll keep those in mind when I do visit ... it'll be a glorious gastronomical death!

I definitely Feist's music... loved the last album... however, the video is a little too "OK Go" for my taste.

Jenny!

Hehehe.. french style tapas (one of the foundations of Susur's culinary skills) are supposed to take hours to finish, but like you, I think their staff are really great with their empathy

I haven't tried too many restaurants yet but there's a few I do want to try, like Bymark, Rain, Mistura. I wanna go to Vancouver and try out Feenie's and Lumiere (Rob Feenie's)

I always hear mixed reviews about the Oliver Bonacini restaurant chains (consistency??), I didn't mind O&B; at Bayview Village

And anytime you wanna chat about food, I'm all ears... and mouth!

J,

Thanks for the feedback and I'm guilty as charged. I'm not an english major and when I type (I type like I talk), I tend to inject my emotions of that moment into my writing. So they don't "kinda" make me the overly cheery guy at the water cooler.. I AM that guy. Whether everyone wants to sock me, or if they can... that's a different question. LOL

Keep coming back, I should be writing soon again. It's still a hobby after all, and I'd like to keep it that way as something that I write occasionally WITH passion.

P.S. I was trying my hardest not to use any exclamation marks, it was damn hard.

I see your point Jomar,

In a way, it is about "knowledge of self". But my dispute against knowledge is that factual knowledge gathering isn't going to get anybody rich without taking action, without owning responsiblity or without will and perseverance. There's no trick process, no sure roadmap. There are so many ways to get there, you can stumble there, you can piggy back on other's mistakes, you can invent your own way. Knowledge is not THE barrier.

I knew it! We were parked on Portland street and I sorta knew it was where you moved to! Diane, you're so lucky! Eat there often? LOL.

Thanks for posting here Matthew. Definitely appreciate it!

I did some more investigation. March 24th, 2006 is the first day of trading for THI. However, Yahoo does not have data for that particular day. As well I found this snippet from a Canadian news story:

"Shares peaked at $37.99 in frenzied trading and wound up the day on the Toronto Stock Exchange at $33.10,"

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTV...

Using currency exchange rates, THI on the NYSE could not have closed anywhere near $33 USD. But it could mean there were intra-day highs achieved throughout the day.

One of my pet peeves is that you're not making clear if the 52-wk high is intra-day figures or based on closing figures. You really gotta decide one way or the other. Your charts representing the figures at market close, so you shouldn't be displaying data contrary to that assumption without some form of notification.

Larry,

Which ones specifically were you looking at with those yields. I'm not sure if we're talking about the same things. =)

Wow, very interesting observation!

BUT... I have not in all my research find a definition that the rule of 72 was meant to be applied by compounding monthly. Where did you get that assumption? I'd love to know!

The formula was meant to determine how money years for money to double and so the unit of measurement that was mentioned was annually / yearly. What would really be the effect if we apply the compounding effect monthly with other rates?

I don't know if anybody's noticed that, but everybody reporting on Chris Pirillo are doing exactly what he's stating in the post. I just thought there's a sweet irony with this meme.

The easiest way you can spot an echo is to look for the words "so and so has a nice post about something something"

1. They're definitely living within their news agrregator
2. They're not saying something original. (it's really not! it's merely their own spin on something existent)
3. Most of the the time, they're quoting/mentioning someone famouse like Chris
4. Though they don't necessary link to the same sites all the time, one can play six degrees of blog linking and come back to the same site again!
5. Waiting a week won't get you links, nor will you get your readers respect, they'll just say, oh... you're so lame, Chris was last week's news!
6. Don't regurgitate? Need I say more?
7. Buzzwords? I saw blogosphere, echo chamber, advice .. the list goes on
8. I seldom find people will be uncomfortable. Look at all those trackbacks on problogger!
9. Lists are so yesterday, wait.. blog about that! And make it into a list if you can!
10. Yah, stop saying we need to get out. After all, we want your audience to be my audience.

Just some rants... =)

That's a very good question, ETF Guy!

My premise is not so much that ETFs are a bad idea. The generalization that market's go up over the long haul is soundly rooted in diversification as a means to represent the market. ETFs started as indexes but have involved to become more like actively managed mutual funds that are traded on the market.

My problem with these leveraged funds are that they're really actively managed / leveraged mutual funds under the guise of ETF, enjoying the popular image that ETFs are diversified and enjoy market-like returns.

As we all know, the majority of actively managed funds cannot beat the market. Leveraged ETFs don't seek to represent the market but seek to beat it. There's high turn over, there can be magnified gains but also magnified losses! How many investors can stand those before they bolt out of the fund? I would say that leveraged ETFs are merely wolves in sheeps' clothing. Looks like an ETF on the outside, but remember, ETFs are not strictly indexes.. some ETFs represent indexes just like some mutual funds represent indexes. The difference being the MER, cost etc.. But in this case... leveraged ETFs are merely an actively managed fund that's tradable on the market. Investors will be subject to the management capabilities of the fund manager. And until I see track record, leveraging with such unknowns isn't ideal for me!

Well, the red paint's on me!

You're right CC, Google does only have a 5 year charts for every security. This case jumped out at me because I was consciously looking for that data. But why not label "Max" as simply 5 year? Why create the illusion of Maximum possible data when it is more accurate to say 5 years worth?

I definitely advocate using a few services because good as Google's interface is, there are some info I have to find elsewhere.

I've updated the post with this information. Thanks!

Thanks Jeff!

Hmm, I'm left wondering what's "interactive" about Interactive Brokers? :P

Thanks for all the comments everyone! Keep them coming!

I actually checked with a friend (no names) who knows much more about law than I do. Most Terms of Service (TOS) agreements usually permit changes in the fee schedule; probably on notice of some kind. Ontario law permits such changes on certain conditions. At the end of the day, it's a marketing question, because if the customer doesn't agree to the change, the provider or the customer can just shut down the account.

As far as the transfer out fee is concerned, depending on the structure of the merger, the first place to look for it is the Ameritrade TOS. If the merger was effected as a so-called Plan of Arrangement, then a Judge may well have approved converting all of the Ameritrade accounts to the TD TOS - unlikely, but possible. If the transfer out fee is entirely new, and there has been no notice given, and the merger wasn't a Plan of Arrangement, then the customer may a point. It seems quite unfair to impose a transfer out fee with no notice at all. TD Ameritrade did send notice about the transfer but failed to highlight the transfer fee issue with merely a mention of its fee schedule.

Personally, I'm interested in hearing more about what you might have to say regarding your experience with other brokers. What are your feelings after you've transferred to E*Trade or Interactive Brokers as some have suggested. The grass is always greener on the other side, but when you get there, is it still as green as you thought? I'm sure many will appreciate those info too! ;)

Thanks for stopping by Mike!

I'd never consider technical analysis "the dark side", more like the "anti-christ"... JUST KIDDING! Might as well exhaust the 6/6/06 references before midnight!

But I'd like for readers to make up their own minds, so I like to blog about all styles and aspects from time to time. Keep up the good work!

Panda,

Turkish coffee is very thick and flavourful. I was told that you're supposed to turn over the cup when you've reach the bottom. People use the leftover coffee trails to tell your fortune!

Just thought about asking if the sellers are planning to upgrade or downgrade? Is 30 bathrooms in the future?

Bill, I feel your pain. But where would your accounts be going? There isn't any viable solution out there in the Canadian marketplace that are under $20 comission. If you know of anything better, care to share?

Thanks for the offer! But I know not when I will be going to New York yet. =)

Good catch Dennis, they're working now! I'll be more diligent in testing out my posts next time!

An actively managed/adjusted index? LOL

Thanks for the comment! Truth be told, I also like reading your reviews on your blog! Though the fights have not gone past the 1st rounds. I'm hoping for some exciting semi-final rounds.

Thanks CC. I almost thought I was crazy thinking that ETFs are sort of derivatives. This is an arena where I readily admit that I'm not familiar with.

Well, the education I'm getting out of this has been great. So ETFs can be considered as derivatives? I've always had a "to each his own" attitude, if you like PPNs, or ETFs, or run-of-the mill mutual funds, stock-picking, options, currency trading... then all the more power to you, AS LONG AS you understand it.

I've exposed my weakness in ETF's. Thanks guys!

Just wanted to add that I'm thinking ETF's are like stocks in that they have a set amount of units/shares available to the public and those units have underlying assets backing them. And trading activities occur on the secondary markets amongst investors. But that doesn't seem right either? Or are they more like closed mutual funds or open mutual funds? I'm so confused!

I expect nothing less from both you II and CC. Your blogs are both among my favourite reads! :)

I guess I wanted to show that, in my opinion, indexes are still being "managed". Not as actively as mutual funds but I stop short of using the word "passive" because I feel that index changes are still more frequent than we think, and the comments by the S&P; chairman are showing that market timing is also a factor in their decision to include and exclude, not to mention that they change their weightings as well.

Ultimately, investing in indexes is not just about the index but about the managers of the index funds as well, how rigid / flexible they wish to stay with the index. Also, I had wished to bring up the discussion of accusations about index changes serving hedge fund managers - as the recent pop-up in Google stock price showed!

I had alluded to the fact that indexes work, or the "index effect" are countered by the length of time the stock stays in the index, so no disagreement there. In regards to the high turnover, it was the tech boom. Many stocks were being put in and out of indexes during that time. So there are times when an index could also resemble an active mutual fund. But it should also be said that normal mutual funds during those times were experiencing 200%+ turnover.

I have not discussed funds where the managers have a mandate to buy and hold (AIC perhaps?). That's for another day.