Collection of Internet/Collection of Internet.iso/faq/misc/investme/general/part3

Text File | 1994-04-14 | 61.5 KB | 1,314 lines

Newsgroups: misc.invest,misc.answers,news.answers,misc.invest.stocks
Path: bloom-beacon.mit.edu!hookup!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!nigel.msen.com!zib-berlin.de!news.uni-ulm.de!rz.uni-karlsruhe.de!stepsun.uni-kl.de!uklirb.informatik.uni-kl.de!bogner.informatik.uni-kl.de!lott
From: [e-mail] (Christopher Lott)
Subject: misc.invest FAQ on general investment topics (part 2 of 3)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Followup-To: misc.invest
Summary: Answers to frequently asked questions about investments.
         Should be read by anyone who wishes to post to misc.invest.
Originator: [e-mail]
Keywords: invest, stock, bond, money, faq
Sender: [e-mail] (Unix-News-System)
Supersedes: <[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: bogner.informatik.uni-kl.de
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Kaiserslautern, Germany
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 1994 01:03:12 GMT
Approved: [e-mail]
Expires: Sun, 8 May 1994 01:02:07 GMT
Lines: 1291
Xref: bloom-beacon.mit.edu misc.invest:37632 misc.answers:511 news.answers:16881 misc.invest.stocks:4540

Archive-name: investment-faq/general/part2
Version: $Id: faq-p2,v 1.13 1994/03/23 06:56:18 lott Exp lott $
Compiler: Christopher Lott, [e-mail]

This is the general FAQ for misc.invest, part 2 of 3.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Hedging
Last-Revised: 11 Dec 1992
From: [e-mail]

Hedging is a way of reducing some of the risk involved in holding
an investment.  There are many different risks against which one can
hedge and many different methods of hedging.  When someone mentions
hedging, think of insurance.  A hedge is just a way of insuring an
investment against risk.

Consider a simple (perhaps the simplest) case.  Much of the risk in
holding any particular stock is market risk; i.e. if the market falls
sharply, chances are that any particular stock will fall too.  So if
you own a stock with good prospects but you think the stock market in
general is overpriced, you may be well advised to hedge your position.

There are many ways of hedging against market risk.  The simplest,
but most expensive method, is to buy a put option for the stock you own.
(It's most expensive because you're buying insurance not only against
market risk but against the risk of the specific security as well.)
You can buy a put option on the market (like an OEX put) which will
cover general market declines.  You can hedge by selling financial
futures (e.g. the S&P 500 futures).

In my opinion, the best (and cheapest) hedge is to sell short the
stock of a competitor to the company whose stock you hold.  For example,
if you like Microsoft and think they will eat Borland's lunch, buy MSFT
and short BORL. No matter which way the market as a whole goes, the
offsetting positions hedge away the market risk.  You make money as
long as you're right about the relative competitive positions of the
two companies, and it doesn't matter whether the market zooms or crashes.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Instinet
Last-Revised: 31 Jan 94
From: [e-mail]

Instinet is a professional stock trading system which is owned by
Reuters.  Institutions use the system to trade large blocks of shares
with each other without using the exchanges.  Commissions are slightly
negotiable but generally $1 per hundred shares.  Instinet also runs a
crossing network of the NYSE last sale at 6pm.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Investment Associations (AAII and NAIC)
Last-Revised: 12 Sep 1993
From: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]
    [e-mail]

AAII:    American Association of Individual Investors
    625 North Michigan Avenue
    Chicago, IL 60611-3110
    [phone]

A summary from their brochure: AAII believes that individuals would
do better if they invest in "shadow" stocks which are not followed
by institutional investor and avoid affects of program trading.
They admit that most of their members are experienced investors with
substantial amounts to invest, but they do have programs for newer
investors also.  Basically, they don't manage the member's money,
they just provide information.

Membership costs $49 per year for an individual; with Computerized
Investing newsletter, $79.  A lifetime membership (including
Computerized Investing) costs $490.

They offer the AAII Journal 10 times a year, Individual Investor's guide
to No-Load Mutual Funds annually, local chapter membership (about 50
chapters), a year-end tax strategy guide, investment seminars and study
programs at extra cost (reduced for members), and a computer user'
newsletter for an extra $30.  They also operate a free BBS.

NAIC:    National Association of Investors Corp.
    1515 East Eleven Mile Road
    Royal Oak, MI 48067
    [phone]

The NAIC is a nonprofit organization operated by and for the benefit
of member clubs.  The Association has been in existence since the 1950's
and has around 110,000 members.

Membership costs $32 per year for an individual, or $30 for a club and
$10.00 per each club member.  The membership provides the member with a
monthly newsletter, details of your membership and information on how to
start a investment club, how to analyze stocks, and how to keep records.

In addition to the information provided, NAIC operates "Low-Cost
Investment Plan", which allows members to invest in participating
companies such as AT&T, Kellogg, McDonald's, Mobil and Quaker Oats...
Most don't incur a commission although some have a nominal fee ($3-$5).

Of the 500 clubs surveyed in 1989, the average club had a compound
annual growth rate of 10.8% compared with 10.6% for the S&P 500 stock
index...It's average portfolio was worth $66,755.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Initial Public Offering (IPO)
Last-Revised: 28 Sep 1993
From: [e-mail]

When a company whose stock is not publicly traded wants to offer
that stock to the general public, it usually asks an "underwriter"
to help it do this work.

The underwriter is almost always an investment banking company, and
the underwriter may put together a syndicate of several investment
banking companies and brokers.    The underwriter agrees to pay the
issuer a certain price for a minimum number of shares, and then must
resell those shares to buyers, often clients of the underwriting firm
or its commercial brokerage cousin.  Each member of the syndicate will
agree to resell a certain number of shares. The underwriters charge a
fee for their services.

For example, if BigGlom Corporation (BGC) wants to offer its privately-
held stock to the public, it may contact BigBankBrokers (BBB) to handle
the underwriting.   BGC and BBB may agree that 1 million shares of BGC
common will be offered to the public at $10 per share.   BBB's fee for
this service will be $0.60 per share, so that BGC receives $9,400,000.
BBB may ask several other firms to join in a syndicate and to help it
market these shares to the public.

A tentative date will be set, and a preliminary prospectus detailing
all sorts of financial and business information will be issued by the
issuer, usually with the underwriter's active assistance.

Usually, terms and conditions of the offer are subject to change up
until the issuer and underwriter agree to the final offer.  At that
point, the issuer releases the stock to the underwriter and the
underwriter releases the stock to the public.  It is now up to the
underwriter to make sure those shares get sold, or else the
underwriter is stuck with stock.

The issuer and the underwriting syndicate jointly determine the price
of a new issue.  The approximate price listed in the red herring (the
preliminary prospectus - often with words in red letters which say
this is preliminary and the price is not yet set) may or may not be
close to the final issue price.

Consider NetManage, NETM which started trading on NASDAQ on Tuesday,
21 Sep 1993.  The preliminary prospectus said they expected to release
the stock at $9-10 per share.  It was released at $16/share and traded
two days later at $26+.  In this case, there could have been sufficient
demand that both the issuer (who would like to set the price as high
as possible) and the underwriters (who receive a commission of perhaps
6%, but who also must resell the entire issue) agreed to issue at 16.
If it then jumped to 26 on or slightly after opening, both parties
underestimated demand.  This happens fairly often.

IPO Stock at the release price is usually not available to most of the
public.  You could certainly have asked your broker to buy you shares
of that stock at market at opening.  But it's not easy to get in on the
IPO.  You need a good relationship with a broker who belongs to the
syndicate and can actually get their hands on some of the IPO.  Usually
that means you need a large account and good business relationship with
that brokerage, and you have a broker who has enough influence to get
some of that IPO.

By the way, if you get a cold call from someone who has an IPO and wants
to make you rich, my advice is to hang up.   That's the sort of IPO that
gives IPOs a bad name.

Even if you that know a stock is to be released within a week, there is
no good way to monitor the release without calling the underwriters every
day.  The underwriters are trying to line up a few large customers to
resell the IPO to in advance of the offer, and that could go faster or
slower than predicted.  Once the IPO goes off, of course, it will start
trading and you can get in on the open market.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Investment Jargon
Last-Revised: 4 Feb 1994
From: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
    [e-mail]

Some common jargon is explained here briefly.  See other articles
in the faq for more detailed explanations on most of these terms.

bottom fishing:    purchasing of stock declining in value

day order:    Order to buy/sell securities at a certain price that
        expires if not executed on the day it is placed.

elves index:    Louis Roukeyser's index of the opinions on the general stock
        market for the next 6 months.  He polls 10 analysts, the same
        ones every week, to ask what they think the general trend will
        be, namely bullish (+1), neutral (0), or bearish (-1).  The
        index range is -10 to +10.

going long:    Buying and holding stock

going short:    Selling stock short, i.e., borrowing and selling stock you
        do not own with the intention of buying it later for less.

GTC order:    Order to buy/sell securities at a certain price that is
        "Good Until Canceled", i.e., never expires.

overbought:     Judgemental adjective describing a market or stock implying
 [oversold]     That people have been wildly buying [selling] it and that
        there is very little chance of it moving upward [downward]
        in the near term.  Usually it applies to movement momentum
        rather than what the security should cost.

over valued, under valued, fairly valued: judgmental adjectives describing
        that a market or stock is over/under/fairly priced with
        respect to what people believe the security is really worth.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Life Insurance
Last-Revised: 23 Mar 1994
From: [e-mail]

This is my standard reply to life insurance queries.  And, I think
many insurance agents will disagree with these comments.

First of all, decide WHY you want insurance.  Think of insurance as
income-protection, i.e., if the insured passes away, the beneficiary
receives the proceeds to offset that lost income.  With that comment
behind us, I would never buy insurance on kids, after all, they don't
have income and they don't work.  An agent might say to buy it on your
kids while its cheap - but run the numbers, the agent is usually
wrong, remember, agents are really salesmen/women and its in their
interest to sell you insurance.  Also - I am strongly against insurance
on kids on two counts.  One, you are placing a bet that you kid will
die and you are actually paying that bet in premiums.  I can't bet my
child will die.  Two, it sounds plausible, i.e., your kid will have a
nest egg when they grow up but factor inflation in - it doesn't look
so good.  A policy of face amount of $10,000, at 4.5% inflation and 30
years later is like having $2,670 in today's dollars - it's NOT a lot
of money.  So don't plan on it being worth much in the future to your
child as an investment.  In summary, skip insurance on your kids.

I also have some doubts about insurance as investments - it might be a
good idea but it certainly muddies the water.  Why not just buy your
insurance as one step and your investment as another step? - its a lot
simpler to keep them separate.

So by now you have decided you want insurance, i.e., to protect your
family against you passing away prematurely, i.e., the loss of income
you represent (your salary, commissions, etc.).

Next decide how LONG you want insurance for.  If you're around 60
years old, I doubt you want to get any at all.  Your income stream is
largely over and hopefully you have accumulated the assets you need
anyway by now.

If you are married and both work, its not clear you need insurance at
all if you pass on.  The spouse just keeps working UNLESS you need
both incomes to support your lifestyle (more common these days).
Then you should have one policy on each of you.

If you are single, its not clear you need life insurance at all.  You
are not supporting anyone so no one cares if you pass on, at least
financially.

If you are married and the spouse is not working, then the breadwinner
needs insurance UNLESS you are independently wealthy.  Some might argue
you should have insurance on your spouse, i.e., as homemaker, child
care provider and so forth.  In my oponion, I would get a SMALL policy
on the spouse, sufficient to cover the costs of burying them and also
sufficient to provide for child care for a few years or so.  Each case
is different but I would look for a small TERM policy on the order of
$50,000 or less.  Get the cheapest you can find, from anywhere.  It
should be quite cheap.  Skip any fancy policies - just go for term and
plan on keeping it until your child is own his/her own.  Then reduce
the insurance coverage on your spouse so it is sufficient to bury your
spouse.

If you are independently wealthy, you don't need insurance because you
already have the money you need.  You might want tax shelters and the
like but that is a very different topic.

Suppose you have a 1 year old child, the wife stays home and the
husband works.  In that case, you might want 2 types of insurance:
Whole life for the long haul, i.e., age 65, 70, etc., and Term until
your child is off on his/her own.  Once the child has left the stable,
your need for insurance goes down since your responsibilities have
diminished, i.e., fewer dependents, education finished, wedding
expenses done, etc

Mortgage insurance is popular but is it worthwhile? Generally not
because it is far too expensive.  Perhaps you want some sort of Term
during the duration of the mortgage - but remember that the mortgage
balance DECLINES over time.  But don't buy mortgage insurance itself -
much too expensive.  Include it in the overall analysis of what
insurance needs you might have.

What about flight insurance? Ignore it.  You are quite safe in
airplanes and flight insurance is incredibly expensive to buy.

Insurance through work? Many larger firms offer life insurance as part
of an overall benefits package.  They will typically provide a certain
amount of insurance for free and insurance beyond that minimum amount
is offered for a fee.  Although priced competitively, it may not be
wise to get more than the 'free' amount offered - why? Suppose you
develop a nasty health condition and then lose your job (and your
benefit-provided insurance)?  Trying to get reinsured elsewhere (with
a health condition) may be *very* expensive.  It is often wiser to have
your own insurance in place through your own efforts - this insurance
will stay with you and not the job.

Now, how much insurance?  One rule of thumb is 5x your annual income.
What agents will ask you is 'Will your spouse go back to work if you
pass away?' Many of us will think nobly and say NO.  But its actually
likely that your spouse will go back to work and good thing -
otherwise your insurance needs would be much larger.  After all, if
the spouse stays home, your insurance must be large enough to be
invested wisely to throw off enough return to live on.  Assume you
make $50,000 and the spouse doesn't work.  You pass on.  The Spouse
needs to replace a portion of your income (not all of it since you
won't be around to feed, wear clothes, drive an insured car, etc.).
Lets assume the Spouse needs $40,000 to live on.  Now that is BEFORE
taxes.  Lets say its $30,000 net to live on.  $30,000 is the annual
interest generated on a $600,000 tax-free investment at 5% per year
(e.g., munibonds).  So this means you need $600,000 of face value
insurance to protect your $50,000 current income.  These numbers will
vary, depending on interest rates at the time you do your analysis and
how much money you spouse will need, factoring in inflation.  But the
point is that you need at least another $600,000 of insurance to fund
if the survivng spouse doesn't and won't work.  Again, the amount will
vary but the concept is the same.

This is only one example of how to do it and income taxes, estate
taxes and inflation can complicate it.  But hopefully you get the
idea.

Which kind of insurance, in my humble opinion, is a function of how
long you need it for.  I once did an analysis of TERM vs WHOLE LIFE and
based on the assumptions at the time, WHOLE LIFE made more sense if I
held the insurance more than about 20-23 years.  But TERM was cheaper
if I held it for a shorter period of time.  How do you do the analysis
and why does the agent want to meet you?  Well, he/she will bring
their fancy charts, tables of numbers and effectively lead you into
thinking that the biggest, most expensive policy is the best for you
over the long term.  Translation: lots of commissions to the agent.
Whole life is what agents make their money on due to commissions.  The
agents typically gets 1/2 of your first year's commissions as his pay.
And he typically gets 10% of the next year's commissions and likewise
through year 5.  Ask him (or her) how they get paid.

If he won't tell you, ask him to leave.  In my opinion, its okay that
the agents get commissions but just buy what you need, don't buy some
huge policy.  The agent may show you compelling numbers on a $1,000,000
whole life policy but do you really need that much? They will make
lots of money on commissions on such a policy, but they will likely
have sold you the "Mercedes Benz" type of policy when a Ford Taurus or
a Saturn sedan model would also be just fine, at far less money.  Buy
the life insurance you need, not what they say.

What I did was to take their numbers, review their assumptions (and
corrected them when they were far-fetched) and did MY analysis.  They
hated that but they agreed my approach was correct.  They will show
you a 12% rate of return to predict the cash value flow.  Ignore that
- it makes them look too good and its not realistic.  Ask him/her
exactly what they plan to invest your premium money in to get 12%.
How has it done in the last 5 years? 10? Use a number between 4.5%
(for TBILL investments, quite conservative) and 8-10% (for growth
stocks, more risky), but not definitely not 12%.  I would try 8% and
insist it be done that way.

Ask each agent: 1)-what is the present value of the payment stream
represented by the premiums, using a discount rate of 4.5% per year
(That is the inflation average since 1940).  This is what the policy
costs you, in today's dollars.  Its very much like paying that single
number now instead of a series of payments over time.  If they disagree
with 4.5%, remind them that since 1926, inflation has averaged 3.5%
(Ibbotson Associates) and then suggest they use 3.5% instead.  They may
then agree with the 4.5% (!)  The lower the number, the more expensive
the policy is.  2)-what is the present value of the the cash value
earned (increasing at no more than 8% a year) and discounting it back
to today at the same 4.5%.  This is what you get for that money you
just paid, in cash value, expressed in today's dollars, i.e., as if you
got it today in the mail.  3)-What is the present value of the life
insurance in force over that same period, discounted back to today by
4.5%, for inflation.  That is the coverage in effect in today's
dollars.  4)-Pick an end date for comparing these - I use age 60 and
age 65.

With the above in hand from various agents, you can see fairly quickly
which is the better policy, i.e., which gives you the most for your
money.

By the way, inflation is slippery and sneaky.  All too often we see
$500,000 of insurance and it sounds great, but at 4.5% inflation and
30 years from now, that $500,000 then is like $133,500 now - truly!

Have the agent do your analysis, BUT you give him the rates to use,
don't use his.  Then you pick the policy that is the best value, i.e.,
you get more for your money.  Factor in any tax angles as well.  If
the agent refuses to do this analysis for you, get rid of him/her.

If the agent gets annoyed but cannot fault your analysis, then you
have cleared the snow away and gotten to the truth.  If they smile too
much, you may have missed something.  And that will cost you money.

Never agree to any policy unless you understand all the numbers and
all the terms.  Never 'upgrade' policies by cashing in a whole life
for another whole life.  That just depletes your cash value, real cash
available to you.  And the agent gets to pocket that money, literally,
through new commissions.  Its no different that just writing a personal
check, payable to the agent.

Check out the insurer by going to the reference section of a big
library.  Ask for the AM BEST guide on insurance.  Look up where the
issuer stands relative to the competition, on dividends, on cash
value, on cost of insurance per premium dollar.

Agents will usually not mention TERM since they work on commission and
get much more money for Whole Life than they do for term.  Remember,
The agents gets about 1/2 of your 1st years premium payments and 10%
or so for all the money you send in over the following 4 years.  Ask
them to tell you how they are paid- after all, its your money they are
getting.

Now why don't I like UNIVERSAL or VARIABLE?  Mainly because with Whole
Life and with TERM, you know exactly what you must pay because the
issuer must manage the investments to generate the appropriate returns
to provide you with the insurance (and with cash value if whole life).
With UNIVERSAL and VARIABLE, it becomes YOU who must decide how and
where to invest your premium income.  If you guess badly, you will
have to pay a higher premium to cover those bad decisions.  The
insurance companies invented UNIVERSAL and VARIABLE because interest
rates went crazy in the early 80's and they lost money.  Rather than
taking that risk again, they offered these new policies to transfer
that risk to you.  Of course, UNIVERSAL and VARIABLE will be cheaper
in the short term but BE CAREFUL - they can and often will increase
later on.

Okay, so what did I do? I bought both term and whole life.  I plan to
keep the term until my son graduates from college and he is on his
own.  That is about 10 years from now.  I also bought whole life
(NorthWest Mutual) which I plan to keep forever, so to speak.  NWM is
apparently the cheapest and best around according to A.M.BEST.  At this
point, after 3 years with NWM, I make more in cash value each year
than I pay into the policy in premiums.  Thus, they are paying me to
stay with them.

Where do you buy term? Just buy the cheapest policy since you will
tend to renew the policy once a year and you can change insurers each
time.  Check your local savings bank as one source.

Suppose an agent approaches you about a new policy and wishes to
update your old ones and switch you into the new policy or new
financial product they are offering?  BE CAREFUL: When you switch
policies, you close out the old one, take out its cash value and buy a
new one.  But very often you must start paying those hidden commissions
all over again.  You won't see it directly but look carefully at how
the cash value grows in the first few years.  It won't grow much
because the 'cash' is usually paying the commissions again.  Bottom
line: You usually pay commissions twice - once on the old policy and
again on the new policy - for generally the same insurance.  Thus you
paid twice for the same product.  Again - be careful and make sure it
makes sense to switch policies.

A hard thing to factor in is that one day you may become uninsurable
just when you need it, i.e., heart attack, cancer and the like.  I
would look at getting cheap term insurance but add in the options of
'guaranteed convertible' (to whole life) and 'guarranteed renewable'
(they must provide the insurance).  It will add somewhat to the cost of
the insurance.

Last thought.  I'll bet you didn't you know that you are 3x more
likely to become disabled during your working career than you to die
during your working career.  How is your short term disability
insurance looking?  Get a policy that has a waiting period before it
kicks in.  This will keep it cheaper.  Look at the exclusions, if any.

These comments are MY opinion and not my employers.  All the usual
disclaimers apply and your mileage may vary depending on individual
circumstances.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Money-Supply Measures M1, M2, and M3
Last-Revised: 11 Dec 1992
From: [e-mail]

M1: Money that can be spent immediately.  Includes cash, checking accounts,
    and NOW accounts.

M2: M1 + assets invested for the short term.  These assets include money-
    market accounts and money-market mutual funds.

M3: M2 + big deposits.  Big deposits include institutional money-market
    funds and agreements among banks.

"Modern Money Mechanics," which explains M1, M2, and M3 in gory detail,
is available free from:
        Public Information Center
        Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago
        P.O. Box 834
        Chicago, Illinois 60690

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Market Makers and Specialists
Last-Revised: 28 Jan 94
From: [e-mail]

Both Market Makers (MMs) and Specialists (specs) make market in stocks.
MMs are part of the National Association of Securities Dealers market
(NASD), sometimes called Over The Counter (OTC), and specs work on the
New York Stock Exchange (NYSE).  These people serve a similar function
but MMs and specs have a number of differences.  NASDAQ stands for the
National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotation system.

NASDAQ is a dealer system.  A firm can become a market maker (MM) on
NASDAQ by applying.  The requirements are relatively small, including
certain capital requirements, electronic interfaces, and a willingness
to make a two-sided market.  You must be there every day.  If you don't
post continuous bids and offers every day you can be penalized and not
allowed to make a market for a month.  The best way to become a MM is
to go to work for a firm that is a MM.  MMs are regulated by the NASD
which is overseen by the SEC.

The NYSE uses an agency auction market system which is designed to
allow the public to meet the public as much as possible.  The majority
of volume (approx 88%) occurs with no intervention from the dealer.
The responsibility of a spec is to make a fair and orderly market in
the issues assigned to them.  They must yield to public orders which
means they may not trade for their own account when there are public
bids and offers.  The spec has an affirmative obligation to eliminate
imbalances of supply and demand when they occur.  The exchange has
strict guidelines for trading depth  and continuity that must be
observed.  Specs are subject to fines and censures if they fail to
perform this function.

There are 1366 NYSE members.  Approximately 450 are specialists
working for 38 specialists firms.  As of 11/93 there are 2283 common
and 597 preferred stocks listed on the NYSE.  Each individual spec
handles approximately 6 issues.  The very big stocks will have a spec
devoted solely to them.  NYSE specs have large capital requirements
and are overseen by Market Surveillance at the NYSE.

Every listed stock has one firm assigned to it on the floor.  Most
stocks are also listed on regional exchanges in LA, SF, Chi., Phil.,
and Bos.  All NYSE trading (approx 80% of total volume) will occur at
that post on the floor of the specialist assigned to it.  To become a
NYSE spec the normal route is to go to work for a specialist firm as a
clerk and eventually to become a broker.

In the OTC public almost always meets dealer which means it is nearly
impossible to buy on the bid or sell on the ask.  The dealers can buy
on the bid even though the public is bidding.  Both spec and MM are
required to make a continuous market but in the case of MM's their is
no one firm who has to take the responsibility if trading is not fair
or orderly.  During the crash the NYSE performed much better than
NASDAQ.  This was in spite of the fact that some stocks have 30+ MMs.
Many OTC firms simply stopped making markets or answering phones until
the dust settled.

As you can see there are a similarities and differences.  Most academic
literature shows NYSE stocks trade better (in tighter ranges, less
volatility, less difference in price between trades).  On the NYSE 93%
of trades occur at no change or 1/8 of a point difference.

It is counterintuitive that one spec could make a better market than
20 MMs.  The spec operates under an entirely different system.  This
system requires exposure of public orders to the auction and the
opportunity for price improvement and to trade ahead of the dealer.
The system on  the NYSE is very different than NASDAQ and has been
shown to create a better market for the stocks listed there.  This is
why 90% of US stocks that are eligible for NYSE listing have listed.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: NASD Public Disclosure Hotline
Last-Revised: 15 Aug 1993
From: [e-mail], [e-mail]

The number for the NASD Public Disclosure Hotline is [phone].
They will send you information about cases in which a broker was
found guilty of violating the law.

I believe that the information that the NASD provides has been
enhanced to include pending cases.  In the past, they could
only mention cases in which the security dealer was found
guilty.   (Of course, "enhanced" is in the eye of the beholder.)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: One-Letter Ticker Symbols
Last-Revised: 11 Jun 1993
From: [e-mail]

Not all of the one-letter symbols are obvious, nor does a one-letter
symbol mean the stock is a blue chip or even well known.  Most, but
not all, trade on the NYSE.  The current list of one-letter symbols
follows.  I'm not sure about "H" - has that been reassigned recently?
Also "M" might have been reassigned.

A  Attwoods plc
B  Barnes Group
C  Chrysler Corporation
D  Dominion Resources
E  Transco Energy
F  Ford Motor Company
G  Gillette
H  Harcourt General (formerly General Cinema; H used to be Helm Resources)
I  First Interstate Bancorp
J  Jackpot Enterprises
K  Kellogg
L  Loblaw Companies
M  M-Corp ( defunct - absorbed by BancOne )
N  Inco, Ltd.
O  Odetics  (O.A & O.B  - no "O")
P  Phillips Petroleum
R  Ryder Systems
S  Sears, Roebuck & Company
T  AT&T
U  US Air
V  Vivra Inc
W  Westvaco
X  US Steel
Y  Alleghany Corp.
Z  Woolworth

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: One-Line Wisdom
Last-Revised: 22 Aug 1993
From: [e-mail]

This is a collection of one-line pieces of investment wisdom, with brief
explanations.  Use and apply at your own risk or discretion.  They are
not in any particular order.

1.  Hang up on cold calls.

    While it is theoretically possible that someone is going to offer
    you the opportunity of a lifetime, it is more likely that it is some
    sort of scam.  Even if it is legitimate, the caller cannot know your
    financial position, goals, risk tolerance, or any other parameters
    which should be considered when selecting investments.  If you can't
    bear the thought of hanging up, ask for material to be sent by mail.

2.  Don't invest in anything you don't understand.

    There were horror stories of people who had lost fortunes by being
    short puts during the 87 crash.  I imagine that they had no idea of
    the risks they were taking.  Also, all the complaints about penny
    stocks, whether fraudulent or not, are partially a result of not
    understanding the risks and mechanisms.

3.  If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is [too good to be true].
3a. There's no such thing as a free lunch (TNSTAAFL).

    Remember, every investment opportunity competes with every other
    investment opportunity.  If one seems wildly better than the others,
    there are probably hidden risks or you don't understand something.

4.  If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

    Someone (possibly a financial planner) with a very limited selection
    of products will naturally try to jam you into those which s/he sells.
    These may be less suitable than other products not carried.

5.  Don't rush into an investment.

    If someone tells you that the opportunity is closing, filling up fast,
    or in any other way suggests a time pressure, be *very* leery.

6.  Very low priced stocks require special treatment.

    Risks are substantial, bid/asked spreads are large, prices are
    volatile, and commissions are relatively high.  You need a broker
    who knows how to purchase these stocks and dicker for a good price.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Option Symbols
Last-Revised: 12 Sep 1993
From: [e-mail]

    Month  Call    Put
    -----  ----    ---
    Jan    A    M
    Feb    B    N
    Mar    C    O
    Apr    D    P
    May    E    Q
    Jun    F    R
    Jul    G    S
    Aug    H    T
    Sep    I    U
    Oct    J    V
    Nov    K    W
    Dec    L    X

   Price Code    Price
   ----------    -----
    A    x05
    U    7.5
    B    x10
    V    12.5
    C    x15
    W    17.5
    D    x20
    X    22.5
    E    x25
    F    x30
    G    x35
    H    x40
    I    x45
    J    x50
    K    x55
    L    x60
    M    x65
    N    x70
    O    x75
    P    x80
    Q    x85
    R    x90
    S    x95
    T    x00

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Options on Stocks
Last-Revised: 24 Feb 1993
From: [e-mail]

An option is a contract between a buyer and a seller.  The option
is connected to something, such as a listed stock, an exchange index,
futures contracts, or real estate.  For simplicity, I will discuss
only options connected to listed stocks.

The option is designated by:
    - Name of the associated stock
    - Strike price
    - Expiration date
    - The premium paid for the option, plus brokers commission.

The two most popular types of options are Calls and Puts.

    Example:  The Wall Street Journal might list an
                IBM Oct 90 Call @ $2.00

    Translation:  This is a Call Option

    The company associated with it is IBM.
    (See also the price of IBM stock on the NYSE.)

    The strike price is $90.00  If you own this option,
    you can buy IBM @ $90.00, even if it is then trading on
    the NYSE @ $100.00 (I should be so lucky!)

    The option expires on the third Saturday following
    the third Friday of October, 1992.
    (an option is worthless and useless once it expires)

    If you want to buy the option, it will cost you $2.00
    plus brokers commissions.   If you want to sell the option,
    you will get $2.00 less commissions.

In general, options are written on blocks of 100s of shares.  So when
you buy "1" IBM Oct 90 Call @ $2.00 you actually are buying a contract
to buy 100 shares of IBM @ $90 per share ($9,000) on or before the
expiration date in October.   You will pay $200 plus commission to buy
the call.

If you wish to exercise your option you call your broker and say you
want to exercise your option.  Your broker will arrange for the person
who sold you your option (a financial fiction:  A computer matches up
buyers with sellers in a magical way) to sell you 100 shares of IBM for
$9,000 plus commission.

If you instead wish to sell (sell=write) that option you instruct your
broker that you wish to write 1 Call IBM Oct 90s, and the very next day
your account will be credited with $200 less commission.

If IBM does not reach $90 before the call expires, the option writer
gets to keep that $200 (less commission)   If the stock does reach above
$90, you will probably be "called."

If you are called you must deliver the stock.  Your broker will sell
your IBM stock for $9000 (and charge commission).  If you owned the
stock, that's OK. If you did not own the stock your broker will buy
the stock at market price and immediately sell it at $9000.  You pay
commissions each way.

If you write a Call option and own the stock that's called "Covered
Call Writing."  If you don't own the stock it's called "Naked Call
Writing."   It is quite risky to write naked calls, since the price of
the stock could zoom up and you would have to buy it at the market price.

My personal advice for new options people if to begin by writing
covered call options for stocks currently trading below the strike
price of the option (write out-of-the-money covered calls).

When the strike price of a call is above the current market price of
the associated stock, the call is "out of the money," and when the
strike price of a call is below the current market price of the
associated stock, the call is "in the money."

Most regular folks like you and me do not exercise our options; we
trade them back, covering our original trade.  Saves commissions and
all that.

The other common option is the PUT.  If you buy a put from me, you
gain the right to sell me your stock at the strike price on or before
the expiration date.  Puts are almost the mirror-image of calls.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: P/E Ratio
Last-Revised: 22 Jan 1993
From: [e-mail], [e-mail]

P/E is shorthand for Price/Earnings Ratio.  The price/earnings ratio is
a tool for determining the value the market has placed on a common stock.
A lot can be said about this little number, but in short, companies
expected to grow and have higher earnings in the future should have a
higher P/E than companies in decline.  For example, if Amgen has a lot
of products in the pipeline, I wouldn't mind paying a large multiple of
its current earnings to buy the stock.  It will have a large P/E.  I am
expecting it to grow quickly.

P/E is determined by dividing the current market price of one share
of a company's stock by that company's per-share earnings (after-tax
profit divided by number of outstanding shares).  For example, a company
that earned $5M last year, with a million shares outstanding, had
earnings per share of $5.  If that company's stock currently sells for
$50/share, it has a P/E of 10.  Investors are willing to pay $10 for
every $1 of last year's earnings.

P/Es are traditionally computed with trailing earnings (earnings from
the year past, called a trailing P/E) but are sometimes computed with
leading earnings (earnings projected for the year to come, called a
leading P/E).  Like other indicators, it is best viewed over time,
looking for a trend.  A company with a steadily increasing P/E is being
viewed by the investment community as becoming more and more speculative.

PE is a much better comparison of the value of a stock than the price.
A $10 stock with a PE of 40 is much more "expensive" than a $100 stock
with a PE of 6.  You are paying more for the $10 stock's future earnings
stream.  The $10 stock is probably a small company with an exciting product
with few competitors.  The $100 stock is probably pretty staid - maybe a
buggy whip manufacturer.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Pink Sheet Stocks
Last-Revised: 27 Oct 1993
From: [e-mail], [e-mail]

A company whose shares are traded on the so-called "pink sheets" is
commonly one that does not meet the minimal criteria for capitalization
and number of shareholders that are required by the NASDAQ and OTC and
most exchanges to be listed there.  The "pink sheet" designation is a
holdover from the days when the quotes for these stocks were printed
on pink paper.  "Pink Sheet" stocks have both advantages and disadvantages.

Disadvantages:
1) Thinly traded.  Can make it tough (and expensive) to buy or sell shares.
2) Bid/Ask spreads tend to be pretty steep.  So if you bought today the
   stock might have to go up 40-80% before you'd make money.
3) Market makers may be limited.  Much discussion has taken place in this
   group about the effect of a limited number of market makers on thinly
   traded stocks.  (They are the ones who are really going to profit).
4) Can be tough to follow.  Very little coverage by analysts and papers.

Advantages:
1) Normally low priced.  Buying a few hundred share shouldn't cost a lot.
2) Many companies list in the "Pink Sheets" as a first step to getting
   listed on the National Market.  This alone can result in some price
   appreciation, as it may attract buyers that were previously wary.

In other words, there are plenty of risks for the possible reward,
but aren't there always?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Renting vs. Buying a Home
Last-Revised: 28 Jan 94
From: [e-mail], [e-mail]

This note will explain one way to compare the monetary costs of renting
vs. buying a home.  It is extremely predjudiced towards the US system.
Small C programs for computing future value, present value, and loan
amortization schedules (used to write this article) are available from
the compiler of this FAQ.  Simply mail a note with any subject and
contents to the following address:  lott=[e-mail]

SUMMARY:
 - If you are guaranteed an appreciation rate that is a few points above
   inflation, buy.
 - If the monthly costs of buying are basically the same as renting, buy.
 - The shorter the term, the more advantageous it is to rent.
 - Tax consequences in the US are fairly minor in the long term.


The three important factors that affect the analysis the most:
    1) Relative cash flows; e.g., rent compared to monthly ownership expenses
    2) Length of term
    3) Rate of appreciation

The approach used here is to determine the present value of the money
you will pay over the term for the home. In the case of buying, the
appreciation rate and thereby the future value of the home is estimated.
This analysis neglects utility costs because they can easily be the
same whether you rent or buy.  However, adding them to the analysis
is simple; treat them the same as the costs for insurance in both cases.

Opportunity costs of buying are effectively captured by the present value.
For example, pretend that you are able to buy a house without having to
have a mortgage.  Now the question is, is it better to buy the house with
your hoard of cash or is it better to invest the cash and continue to rent?
To answer this question you have to have estimates for rental costs and
house costs (see below), and you have a projected growth rate for the cash
investment and projected growth rate for the house.  If you project a 4%
growth rate for the house and a 15% growth rate for the cash then holding
the cash would be a much better investment.


Renting a Home.

* Step 1: Gather data. You will need:
    - monthly rent
    - renter's insurance     (usually inexpensive)
    - term             (period of time over which you will rent)
    - estimated inflation rate to compute present value (historically 4.5%)
    - estimated annual rate of increase in the rent (can use inflation rate)

* Step 2: Compute the present value of the cash stream that you will pay over
the term, which is the cost of renting over that term.  This analysis assumes
that there are no tax consequences (benefits) associated with paying rent.

Long-term example:
    Rent          =  990 / month
    Insurance         =  10 / month
    Term        =  30 years
    Rent increases    =  4.5% annually
    Inflation         =  4.5% annually
    For this cash stream, present value = 348,137.17.

Short-term example:
    Same numbers, but just 2 years.  Present value = 23,502.38


Buying a Home.

* Step 1: Gather data. You need a lot to do a fairly thorough analysis:
    - purchase price
    - down payment & closing costs
    - other regular expenses, such as condo fees
    - amount of mortgage
    - mortgage rate
    - mortgage term
    - mortgage payments (this is tricky for a variable-rate mortgage)
    - property taxes
    - homeowner's insurance
    - your tax bracket
    - the current standard deduction you get
  Other values have to be estimated, and they affect the analysis critically:
    - continuing maintenance costs (I estimate 1/2 of PP over 30 years.)
    - estimated inflation rate to compute present value (historically 4.5%)
    - rate of increase of property taxes, maintenance costs, etc. (infl. rate)
    - appreciation rate of the home (THE most important number of all)

* Step 2: compute the monthly expense.  This includes the mortgage payment,
fees, property tax, insurance, and maintenance.  The mortgage payment is
fixed, but you have to figure inflation into the rest.  Then compute the
present value of the cash stream.

* Step 3: compute your tax savings.  This is different in every case, but
roughly you multiply your tax bracket times the amount by which your interest
plus other deductible expenses (e.g., property tax, state income tax) exceeds
your standard deduction.  No fair using the whole amount because everyone
gets the standard deduction for free.  Must be summed over the term because
the standard deduction will increase annually, as will your expenses.  Note
that late in the mortgage your interest payments will be be well below the
standard deduction.  I compute savings of about 5% for 33% tax bracket.

* Step 4: compute the future value of the home based on the purchase
price, estimated appreciation rate, and the term.  Once you have the
future value, compute the present value of that sum based on the
inflation rate you estimated earlier and the term you used to compute
future value.   If appreciation > inflation, you win.  Else you lose.

* Step 5: Compute final cost.  All numbers must be in present value.
    Final-cost = Down-payment + S2 (expenses) - S3 (tax sav) - S4 (prop value)

Long-term example #1:

* Step 1 - the data:
    Purchase price   =  145,000
    Down payment etc =  10,000
    Mortgage amount  =  140,000
    Mortgage rate    =  8.00%
    Mortgage term    =  30 years
    Mortgage payment =  1027.27 / mo
    Property taxes   =  about 1% of valuation; I'll use 1200/yr = 100/mo
            (which increases same as inflation, we'll say)
    Homeowner's ins  =  50 / mo
    Condo fees etc   =  0
    Tax bracket         =  33%
    Standard ded     =  5600
  Estimates:
    Maintenance      =  1/2 PP is 72,500, or 201/mo; I'll use 200/mo
    Inflation rate   =  4.5% annually
    Prop taxes incr  =  4.5% annually
    Home appreciates =  6% annually (the NUMBER ONE critical factor)

* Step 2 - the monthly expense, both fixed and changing components:
Fixed component is the mortgage at 1027.27 monthly.  Present value = 203,503.48
Changing component is the rest at   350.00 monthly.  Present value = 121,848.01
Total from Step 2: 325,351.49

* Step 3 - the tax savings.
I use my loan program to compute this.  Based on the data given above,
I compute the savings: Present value = 14,686.22.  Not much at all.

* Step 4 - the future and present value of the home.
See data above.  Future value = 873,273.41 and present value = 226,959.96
(which is larger than 145k since appreciation > inflation)
Before you compute present value, you should subtract reasonable closing
costs for the sale; for example, a real estate brokerage fee.

* Step 5 - the final analysis for 6% appreciation.
Final = 10,000 + 325,351.49 - 14,686.22 - 226,959.96
      = 93,705.31

So over the 30 years, assuming that you sell the house in the 30th year for
the estimated future value, the present value of your total cost is 93k.
(You're 93k in the hole after 30 years ~~ you only paid 260.23/month.)

Long-term example #2:  all numbers the same BUT the home appreciates 7%/year.
Step 4 now comes out FV=1,176,892.13 and PV=305,869.15
Final = 10,000 + 325,351.49 - 14,686.22 - 305,869.15
      = 14796.12
So in this example, 7% was an approximate break-even point in the absolute
sense; i.e., you lived for 30 years at near zero cost in today's dollars.

Long-term example #3:  all numbers the same BUT the home appreciates 8%/year.
Step 4 now comes out FV=1,585,680.80 and PV=412,111.55
Final = 10,000 + 325,351.49 - 14,686.22 - 412,111.55
      = -91,446.28
The negative number means you lived in the home for 30 years and left it in
the 30th year with a profit; i.e., you were paid to live there.

Long-term example #4: all numbers the same BUT the home appreciates 2%/year.
Step 4 now comes out FV=264,075.30 and PV=68,632.02
Final = 10,000 + 325,351.49 - 14,686.22 - 68,632.02
      = 252,033.25
In this case of poor appreciation, home ownership cost 252k in today's money,
or about 700/month.  If you could have rented for that, you'd be even.

Short-term example #1:  all numbers the same as Long-term example #1, but you
sell the home after 2 years.  Future home value in 2 years is 163,438.17
Cost  = down&cc + all-pymts - tax-savgs - pv(fut-home-value - remaining debt)
      = 10,000  + 31,849.52 - 4,156.81  - pv(163,438.17 - 137,563.91)
      = 10,000  + 31,849.52 - 4,156.81  - 23,651.27
      = 14,041.44

Short-term example #2:  all numbers the same as Long-term example #4, but you
sell the home after 2 years.  Future home value in 2 years is 150,912.54
Cost  = down&cc + all-pymts - tax-savgs - pv(fut-home-value - remaining debt)
      = 10,000  + 31,849.52 - 4,156.81  - pv(150912.54 - 137,563.91)
      = 10,000  + 31,849.52 - 4,156.81  - 12,201.78
      = 25,490.93


Some closing comments:

Once again, the three important factors that affect the analysis the most
are cash flows, term, and appreciation.  If the relative cash flows are
basically the same, then the other two factors affect the analysis the most.

The longer you hold the house, the less appreciation you need to beat renting.
This relationship always holds, however, the scale changes.  For shorter
holding periods you also face a risk of market downturn.  If there is a
substantial risk of a market downturn you shouldn't buy a house unless you
are willing to hold the house for a long period.

If you have a nice cheap rent controlled appartment, then you should probably
not buy.

There are other variables that affect the analysis, for example, the inflation
rate.  If the inflation rate increases, the rental scenario tends to get much
worse, while the ownership scenario tends to look better.

Question:  Is it true that you can usually rent for less than buying?

Answer 1:  It depends.  It isn't a binary state.  It is a fairly complex set
of relationships.

In large metropolitan areas, where real estate is generally much more expensive
then it is usually better to rent, unless you get a good appreciation rate or
if you are going to own for a long period of time.  It depends on what you can
rent and what you can buy.  In other areas, where real estate is relatively
cheap, I would say it is probably better to own.

On the other hand, if you are currently at a market peak and the country is
about to go into a recession it is better to rent and let property values and
rent fall.  If you are currently at the bottom of the market and the economy
is getting better then it is better to own.

Answer 2:  When you rent from somebody, you are paying that person to assume
the risk of homeownership.  Landlords are renting out property with the long
term goal of making money.  They aren't renting out property because they want
to do their renters any special favors.  This suggests to me that it is
generally better to own.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Retirement Plan - 401(k)
Last-Revised: 1 Apr 1993
From: [e-mail]

A 401(k) plan is an employee-funded, retirement savings plan.  It
takes its name from the section of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 which created these plans.  An employer will typically match
a certain percent of the amount contributed to the plan by the
employee, up to some maximum.  Note: I have been looking at my 401(k)
in pretty good detail lately, but this article is subject to my
standard disclaimer that I'm not responsible for errors or poor advice.

Example: the employee can contribute up to 7% of gross pay to the
     fund, and the company matches this money at 50%.  Total
     contribution to the plan is 10.5% of the employee's salary.

Pre-tax contributions: Employees have the option of making all or part
of their contributions from pre-tax (gross) income.  This has the added
benefit of reducing the amount of tax paid by the employee from each
check now and deferring it until you take this pre-tax money out of
the plan.  Both the employer contribution (if any) and any growth of
the fund compound tax-free until age 59-1/2, when the employee is
eligible to receive distributions from the plan.

Pre-tax note: Current law allows up to a maximum of 15% to be deducted
from your pay before federal income and (in most places) state or local
income taxes are calculated.  There are IRS rules which regulate
withdrawals of pre-tax contributions and which place limits on pre-tax
contributions; these affect how much you can save.

After-tax contributions: If you elect to save any of your contributions
on an after-tax basis, the contribution comes out of your pay after
taxes are deducted.  While it doesn't help your current tax situation,
these funds may be easier to withdraw since they are not subject to the
strict IRS rules which apply to pre-tax contributions.  Later, when
you receive a distribution from the 401(k), you pay no tax on the
portion of your distribution attributed to after-tax contributions.

Contribution limits: IRS rules won't allow contributions on pay over
a certain amount (limit was $228,860 in 1992, and is subject to change).
The IRS also limits how much total pre-tax pay you can contribute
(limit was $8,728 in pre-tax money in 1992, and is subject to change).
Employees who are defined as "highly compensated" by the IRS (salary
over $60,535 in 1992 - again, subject to change) may not be allowed to
save at the maximum rates.  Your benefits department should notify you
if you are affected.  Finally, the IRS limits the total amount contributed
to your 401(k) and pension plans each year to the lesser of some amount
($30,000 in 1992, and subject to change of course) or 25% of your annual
compensation.  This is generally taken to mean the amount of taxable
income reported on your W-2 form(s).

Advantages: Since the employee is allowed to contribute to his/her
401(k) with pre-tax money, it reduces the amount of tax paid out of
each pay check.  All employer contributions and fund gains (or losses)
grow tax-free until age 59-1/2.  The employee can decide where to
direct future contributions and/or current savings.  If your company
matches your contributions, it's like getting extra money on top of
your salary.  The compounding effect of consistent periodic contributions
over the period of 20 or 30 years is quite dramatic.  Because the
program is a personal investment program for you, the benefits may
not be used as security for loans outside the program.  This includes
the additional protection of the funds from garnishment or attachment
by creditors or assigned to anyone else except in the case of domestic
relations court cases dealing with divorce decree or child support
orders.  While the 401(k) is similar in nature to an IRA, an IRA won't
enjoy any matching company contributions and personal IRA contributions
are only tax deductible if your gross income is under some limit (limit
phases in at $40,000 in 1992).

Disadvantages: It is "difficult" (or at least expensive) to access
your 401(k) savings before age 59-1/2 (see next section).  401(k) plans
don't have the luxury of being insured by the Pension Benefit Guaranty
Corporation (PBGC).  (But then again, some pensions don't enjoy this
luxury either.)

Investments: A 401(k) should have available different investment
options.  These funds usually include a money market, bond funds of
varying maturities (short, intermediate, long term), company stock,
mutual fund, US Series EE Savings Bonds, and others.  The employee
chooses how to invest the savings and is typically allowed to change
where current savings are invested and/or where future contributions
will go a specific number of times a year.  This may be quarterly,
bi-monthly, or some similar time period.  The employee is also
typically allowed to stop contributions at any time.

Accessing savings before age 59-1/2: It is legal to take a loan from
your 401(k) before age 59-1/2 for certain reasons including hardship
loans, buying a house, or paying for education.  When a loan is obtained,
you must pay the loan back with regular payments (these can be set up
as payroll deductions) but you are, in effect, paying yourself back
both the principal and the interest, not a bank.  If you take a
withdrawal from your 401(k) as money other than a loan, not only must
you pay tax on any pre-tax contributions and on the growth, you must
also pay an additional 10% penalty to the government.  In short, you
can get the money out of your 401(k) before age 59-1/2 for something
other than a loan, but it is expensive to do so.

Accessing savings after age 59-1/2: At age 59-1/2 you are allowed to
access your 401(k) savings.  This can be done as a lump sum distribution
or as annual installments.  If you choose the latter, money not withdrawn
from the 401(k) can continue to grow in the fund.  401(k) distributions
are separate from pension funds.

Changing jobs: Since a 401(k) is a company administered plan, if you
change or lose jobs, this can affect your savings.  Different companies
handle this situation in different ways.  Some will allow you to keep
your savings in the program until age 59-1/2.  This is the simplest
idea. Others will require you to take the money out.  Things get more
complicated here.  Your new company may allow you to make a "rollover"
contribution to its 401(k) which would let you take all the 401(k)
savings from your old job and put them into your new company's plan.
If this is not a possibility, you may have to look into an IRA or other
retirement account to put the funds.

Whatever you do regarding rollovers, BE EXTREMELY CAREFUL!!  This can
not be emphasized enough.  Recent legislation by Congress has added a
twist to the rollover procedures.  It used to be that you could receive
the rollover money in the form of a check made out to you and you had
a period of time (60 days) to roll this cash into a new retirement
account (either 401(k) or IRA).  Now, however, employees taking a
withdrawal have the opportunity to make a "direct rollover" of the
taxable amount of a 401(k) to a new plan.  This means the check goes
directly from your old company to your new company (or new plan).
If this is done (ie. you never "touch" the money), no tax is withheld
or owed on the direct rollover amount.  If the direct rollover option
is not chosen, the withdrawal is immediately subject to a mandatory
tax withholding of 20% of the taxable portion which the old company
is required to take.  The remaining 80% must still be rolled over
within 60 days to a new retirement account or else is is subject to
the 10% tax mentioned above.  The 20% withholding can be recovered
using a special form filed with your next tax return to the IRS.
If you forget to file that form, however, the 20% is lost.  Check with
your benefits department if you choose to do any type of rollover of
your 401(k) funds.

Epilogue: If you have been in an employee contributed retirement plan
since before 1986, some of the rules may be different on those funds
invested pre-1986.  Consult your benefits department for more details,

Expert (sic) opinions from financial advisors typically say that
the average 401(k) participant is not aggressive enough with their
investment options.  Historically, stocks have outperformed all other
forms of investment and will probably continue to do so.  Since the
investment period of 401(k) savings is relatively long - 20 to 40
years - this will minimize the daily fluctuations of the market and
allow a "buy and hold" strategy to pay off.  As you near retirement,
you might want to switch your investments to more conservative funds
to preserve their value.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Round Lots of Shares
Last-Revised: 23 Apr 1993
From: [e-mail]

There are some advantages to buying round lots (usually 100 shares)
but if they don't apply to you, then don't worry about it.  Possible
limitations on non-round-lots are:

 - The broker might add 1/8 of a point to the price -- but usually
   the broker will either not do this, or will not do it when you
   place your order before the market opens or after it closes.

 - Some limit orders might not be accepted for odd lots.

 - If these shares cover short calls, you usually need a round lot.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Compilation Copyright (c) 1994 by Christopher Lott, [e-mail]
--
"Christopher Lott / Email: [e-mail] / Tel: [phone]"
"Adresse: FB Informatik - Bau 57 / Universitaet KL / D--67653 Kaiserslautern"