Thursday, 14 October 2010

Rejoicing the Rescue of the Chilean Miners

2010 Copiapó mining accident














Bravo and well done ........













↓Miner↓Age[68]↓Rescue time (CLDT)[5][6]↓Transit time↓
1.Florencio Ávalos3113 October 00:100:51
2.Mario Sepúlveda4013 October 01:101:00
3.Juan Illanes5213 October 02:070:57
4.Carlos Mamani2313 October 03:111:04
5.Jimmy Sánchez1913 October 04:111:00
6.Osmán Araya3013 October 05:351:24
7.José Ojeda4613 October 06:220:47
8.Claudio Yáñez3413 October 07:040:42
9.Mario Gómez6413 October 08:000:56
10.Alex Vega3113 October 08:530:53
11.Jorge Galleguillos5613 October 09:310:38
12.Edison Peña3413 October 10:130:42
13.Carlos Barrios2713 October 10:550:42
14.Víctor Zamora3313 October 11:320:37
15.Víctor Segovia4813 October 12:080:36
16.Daniel Herrera2713 October 12:500:42
17.Omar Reygadas5613 October 13:390:49
18.Esteban Rojas4413 October 14:491:10
19.Pablo Rojas4513 October 15:280:39
20.Darío Segovia4813 October 15:590:31
21.Yonni Barrios5213 October 16:310:32
22.Samuel Ávalos4313 October 17:040:33
23.Carlos Bugueño2713 October 17:330:29
24.José Henríquez5413 October 17:590:26
25.Renán Ávalos2913 October 18:240:25
26.Claudio Acuña4413 October 18:510:27
27.Franklin Lobos5313 October 19:180:27
28.Richard Villarroel2713 October 19:450:27
29.Juan Carlos Aguilar4913 October 20:130:28
30.Raúl Bustos4013 October 20:370:24
31.Pedro Cortez2613 October 21:020:25
32.Ariel Ticona Yáñes2913 October 21:300:26
33.Luis Urzúa5413 October 21:550:27
↓Rescue worker↓Age↓Descent time (CLDT)↓Extraction time (CLDT)↓Transit time↓
1.Pedro Gomez[69]13 October, after 14:0513 October 22:300:31
2.Roberto Ríos[69]13 October 00:1614 October 00:050:23
3.Patricio Robledo[69]13 October 01:1813 October 23:420:25
4.Jorge Bustamante[69]13 October 10:2213 October 23:170:24
5.Patricio Sepúlveda[69]13 October 12:1413 October 22:530:23
6.Manuel González[70]12 October 23:1814 October 00:320:27

Note: The recovery times for several of the rescuers do not necessarily match with the correct names although the names and times are correct.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Copiap%C3%B3_mining_accident

Tuesday, 12 October 2010

The Top 5 Ways to Lose Money Investing

The Top 5 Ways to Lose Money Investing

By Dan Dzombak
October 11, 2010


It is heart-wrenching when you hear stories of investors losing their life savings for avoidable reasons. A recent story in Bloomberg BusinessWeek about Leona Miller, an 84-year-old retired beautician who invested in derivatives, got me thinking of ways people lose money in stocks and how to avoid them.

1. Investing in a product or business you don't understand
Leona Miller bought a structured note called a "reverse convertible note with a knock-in put option tied to Merck stock." Even I was unsure what this meant, and this is one of the more basic structured notes.

Leona collected a 9% coupon and the right to receive her initial capital back at maturity. However, if at any time Merck fell below a certain level (called the "knock-in" level), instead of giving Leona her money back, the bank could give her a predetermined number of shares of Merck. As long as Merck's stock didn't fall, Leona collected her 9%.

If Merck did fall, she would lose huge amounts of money. As you might expect, Merck's price fell below the "knock-in" price, and Leona was left holding stock worth 30% less than her initial investment. I am hard-pressed to believe any amateur investor could fully understand exactly what a "reverse convertible note with a knock-in put option" is. By investing in products you don't understand, you are setting yourself up for disaster.

Peter Lynch has said to invest in businesses and products you understand. Leona's broker wrote that she was familiar with Merck as they manufactured one of her medications. Baloney!

Many people own mortgages and are having trouble paying them off, but that doesn't mean they should go out and invest in Annaly Capital Management (NYSE: NLY) or Chimera Investments (NYSE: CIM), which are real-estate investment trusts (REITs) that specialize in buying up mortgage-backed securities and assessing the risk inherent in residential real estate.

If you don't have an understanding of how a business truly works, don't invest in it! There are many simple businesses out there that anyone can understand.

Two examples: Netflix (Nasdaq: NFLX) has warehouses with DVDs and mail them to people that pay a monthly fee. Waste Management (NYSE: WM) collects trash and recycling. It's that simple.

2. Speculating
If the price of a stock you own drops by 50% tomorrow, do you like the stock more? If not, you are speculating. For example, if Philip Morris (NYSE: PM) drops by half tomorrow, Godsend! It's a financially sound business, recurring revenues, and a strong brand. I would love to be able to buy shares at $25 compared to the $50 per share you can get them for today.

3. Ignoring incentives
If you give someone incentives they will game them, meaning: Do what is in their best interest.

Regular investors, you would never ask a used car salesman if you need another car, or a life insurance salesman if you need more life insurance, so why would you ask a stock broker for advice on stocks? They don't have a professional obligation to put your interests before theirs, what's known as a fiduciary responsibility. If you are looking for advice, seek out a reputable financial advisor and double check they aren't merely brokers under a different name. Make sure they put your interests first and aren't being paid extra based on what funds and products you choose.

Stock pickers, if management is paid and incentivized based on revenue goals or share price goals, management will game them. Be wary of investing in companies with perverse management incentives, and recognize how management will likely game their incentives. Invest in companies in which management owns a considerable stake and how your interests and managements interests are aligned. The best example is Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK-B), whose management of Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger own a combined 24% of the company's stock.

4. Ignoring valuation
Buying outrageously priced companies is setting yourself up for disaster. Investors' memories are very short; does anyone remember the tech stock crash? Baidu (Nasdaq: BIDU) is trading at 100 times earnings. If you want to earn 10% on your money annually, the company must grow its earnings 30% a year for 10 years! One misstep and Baidu will be crushed. Buying a stock hoping to sell it to the next sucker that comes along is a fool's game; buy undervalued companies.

5. Putting all your eggs in one basket
When I meet people who have 50% or more of their portfolio in their company's stock I shudder. While they may "know" their company will do well, if something goes wrong they can be walloped by losing their jobs at the same time their portfolios take a dive. Anyone who worked at Lehman, Enron, etc., can attest to this.

This list could be much longer, but five is good enough for now (No. 6 would be paying high fees). As Warren Buffett once said, "An investor needs to do very little right as long as he or she avoids big mistakes." Avoid these mistakes and prosper.



http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2010/10/11/the-top-5-ways-to-lose-money-investing.aspx

Behavioural Finance: Irrational Behaviour and Stock Market Investing

"You have great skill with your bow, but little control of your mind", said the master to his young archer.

This is also applicable in investing.  You can know everything about valuing companies, but it'll come to nothing if you can't apply it rationally when the heat is on.

Human behaviour is directed by a combination of evolutionary hardwiring and development programming, and you can see both in everything we do.

The trouble is that in stock market investing, a very recent phenomenon in human evolution, we haven't developed behaviours appropriate to it.

The usual range of other behaviour responses that we picked up in our early life are often completely inappropriate.

The greatest enemy in investing is actually yourself.  Beware of your irrational and yet human behaviour jeorpadising your investing.

Warren Buffett fund illustrates 'rip off' management charges

Warren Buffett fund illustrates 'rip off' management charges


By Ian Cowie Your Money
Last updated: September 29th, 2010

If you think the row about fund management charges is a tedious technicality then prepare for a rude awakening. Terry Smith is the latest outspoken multi-millionaire to lob a hand grenade into this debate which will shake the City to its foundations and could bring several institutions crashing down.

He claims investors are left with less than a tenth of the total returns some fund managers receive – and uses Warren Buffett’s famous Berkshire Hathaway fund to illustrate the impact charges can have on long-term returns. Mr Smith says he is “not so much shocked as flabbergasted by the number of people who do not realise the impact of these performance fee structures”.

Taking typical hedge fund fees as an example – but widening his attack to performance fees charged by rising numbers of unit trusts and open-ended investment companies (OEICs) – Mr Smith said: “”As you are aware, Warren Buffett has produced a stellar investment performance over the past 45 years, compounding returns at 20.46 per cent per annum. If you had invested $1,000 in the shares of Berkshire Hathaway when Buffett began running it in 1965, by the end of 2009 your investment would have been worth $4.8m.

“However, if instead of running Berkshire Hathaway as a company in which he co-invests with you, Buffett had set it up as a hedge fund and charged 2 per cent of the value of the funds as an annual fee plus 20 per cent of any gains, of that $4.8m, $4.4m would belong to him as manager and only $400,000 would belong to you, the investor. And this is the result you would get if your hedge fund manager had equalled Warren Buffett’s performance. Believe me, he or she won’t.

“Two and twenty does not work. That does not mean that 1.5 per cent and 15 per cent is OK, or even 1 per cent and 10 per cent. Performance fees do not work. They extract too much of the return and encourage risky behaviour.”

Mr Smith, who was rated the best banking analyst in Britain for five consecutive years in the 1980s before going on to become chief executive of brokers Collins Stewart since 1996 is the latest City gamekeeper to turn poacher by blowing the whistle on established practice in the Square Mile. Like Alan Miller, a former senior fund manager at New Star, Mr Smith plans to launch his own fund management company, offering lower costs and higher returns to investors.

Whether either or both can pull off that double remains to be seen. But, here and now, there is growing resentment among investors about high charges and low returns. Earlier this year, The Daily Telegraph revealed how fund managers pocket more than £7bn a year from charges despite a decade of falling share prices. Mr Miller, a founder of Spencer Churchill Miller Private said: “The time is right for exposure of various elements of the industry.

“It is riddled with blatant self-interest and conflicts of interest that would never be tolerated elsewhere. Investors have become victims as the charges they have to pay have risen and risen while the returns they get have been consistently below par and the actual cost of managing their money has continued to fall.”

Data from Morningstar, a research company, shows the average investment fund has an annual charge of 1.25 per cent. But lesser known administrative fees amount to 0.45 per cent. And trading costs total another 1.35 per cent, according to the Financial Services Authority and Financial Express. When this 1.8 per cent is deducted from the total £406 billion invested, that amounts to £7.3bn being “skimmed off” each year.

Some fund managers have consistently delivered investor returns that more than justified their charges; Neil Woodford at Invesco, Evy Hambro at BlackRock, Robin Geffen at Neptune, Tom Dobell at M&G, Ian Henderson at JP Morgan and Job Curtis at Henderson are six that spring to mind. But many others have failed to do so and while investment returns remain low, interest in charges is likely to increase.

Few investors cared if annual management fees were 1 per cent or 2 per cent back in the 1990s when total returns often ran into double digits. Now they are glad to be grossing 6 per cent or 7 per cent, many more investors are much keener to keep costs to a minimum. Regulatory changes that take effect in 2012 will force further disclosure of costs and accelerate this trend. However much their former colleagues may hate them, Messrs Miller and Smith know which way the wind is blowing and are, as usual, ahead of the game.



http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ianmcowie/100007842/warren-buffett-fund-illustrates-rip-off-management-charges/

Act in investors' interests

John Collett
September 22, 2010
Financial advice reforms under new minister Bill Shorten will benefit consumers.
Financial advice reforms under new minister Bill Shorten will benefit consumers.  
Photo: Glen McCurtayne
The new minority government may not last three years but if it can last at least two, there's a good chance the key reforms to financial advice will become law. The new minister responsible for financial services and superannuation, Bill Shorten, was a union official and trustee of an industry super fund. He should need only a short time to get across his portfolio responsibilities. That's good, because there's much to be implemented from the raft of reforms the previous government proposed in an effort to protect investors seeking financial advice.

The two big reforms - a ban on commissions and other kickbacks and putting planners under a legal obligation to act in their clients' best interest - are badly needed to enhance consumer protection. The reforms will be too late for those hundreds of thousands of retirees who have lost billions of dollars over the past decade with the collapse of Westpoint, Storm Financial, Fincorp, Basis Capital, Great Southern, Timbercorp, Australian Capital Reserve, Opes Prime and dozens of others.

These schemes invested in all sorts of things but the payment of generous commissions to advisers and accountants was a common thread running through them.
Ask yourself this: if it's such a good investment scheme, why would it be offering commissions to incentivise advisers and accountants to sell those products?
Placing planners under a legal obligation to put their clients' interests first should also strengthen the hand of the regulator, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, in policing its beat, which it has not done effectively.

Just about all of the financial services industry, except industry funds, was hoping for a Coalition victory, as the Coalition was against most of the reforms and noncommittal on others. The Greens will hold the balance of power in the Senate from July next year, and will probably support the reforms.

The planning industry needs to get on with moving its businesses away from commissions and to a fee-based model. The collapse last week of yet another forestry scheme, the Melbourne-based Willmott Forests, has renewed criticism of planners and tax accountants who received commissions for recommending it to clients. These schemes were mostly tax rorts for high-income earners, with the investment merits less clear.

Salespeople should be working in sales, not financial planning. The minority Labor government has a plan that will help ensure sales are removed from the advice process. It is a plan that has taken about two years to formulate. At some point there has to be an end to consultation with the financial services industry and adoption of the reforms.

Shorten is ambitious and will probably be keen to push through reforms. It is always a balancing act between competing interests but for too long the interests of the powerful financial services lobby have been put before the interests of consumers.

http://www.smh.com.au/money/investing/act-in-investors-interests-20100922-15m3v.html

Dive back into the market

By Michael Laurence from smartcompany.com.au

It's not too late! That's the key message for cashed-up investors who feel like a deer caught in the headlights and cannot make up their minds whether to re-enter the sharemarket.

On the surface, this may seem a tough call given the S&P/ASX200 has risen more than 60% from its bear market low almost exactly 12 months ago to reach its highest point for 18 months.

And yesterday, the market burst through the 5,000-point barrier – a key psychological marker in its extraordinary comeback.

The bottom-line is that investors have powerful reasons to believe the market will keep rising for some years, and they shouldn't overly focus on returns forfeited to date if they were out of the market.

As Prasad Patkar, portfolio manager for Platypus Asset Management, realistically says: "The quick bucks have been made". No longer are "companies priced to fail which we knew weren't going to fail."

But Patkar believes there is a solid case for cashed-up investors to re-enter the market now – provided they are investing for the long-term and not chasing quick, easy money.

The strongest corporate reporting season for years and expectations for rising profits on the back of improving local and global economies suggest to many market professionals that shares are in the early stages of an extended bull market. Further, companies are enjoying the rewards of sharp cost-cutting during the GFC.

David Cassidy, chief equity strategist for UBS, has a simple message for cashed-up investors who are thinking about re-entering the market: "Equities are still moderately undervalued. Valuations still look quite reasonable – particularly on forward earnings."

Cassidy expects the market to reach 5,500 by the end of the 2010 calendar year. And he believes that inevitable market dips in this volatile market will produce good buying opportunities for investors who are ready to jump.

Shane Oliver, head of investment strategy and chief economist for AMP Capital Investors, says to cashed-up investors who can't make up their minds whether to now re-enter the market: "My view is that the market is still heading higher [but] with more moderate gains." His year-end target for the S&P/ASX200 is 5,600.

"If history is any guide, there is much more upside to come and we are nowhere near the peaks," Oliver adds. He points out that the average cyclical bull market in Australian shares lasts four years and produces gains of 132%. "But so far we have only seen a portion of that."

While Oliver says shares are no longer trading at "dirt cheap" prices, they are not expensive. Their price/earnings multiples (P/E) are still below their long-term average of 14 times. And he expects that corporate earnings will rise by 20% over the next 12 months.

Oliver says AMP Capital Investor's figures for its investors show that there are "lots and lots" of people who moved into cash during the bear market and are still in cash today.

Prasad Patkar's "gut feeling" is that the market will be higher in 12 months time. But over the next two months, he expects the market to move between 4,500 and 5,000 until the world economic outlook becomes clear.

Ideally, the best time to buy would have been 13 months ago before the market sprung back into life. But investors rarely manage to correctly time the market – picking the best time to buy or sell – and attempting to do so usually results in losing money.

Perhaps keep in the back of your mind for the next market downturn that you will pay a high price for missing the sharpest rebound in share prices which usually occurs in first year of a market's recovery.

Here are five tips for moving cash back into the market:

1. Drip-feed your purchases: Don't put all of your cash back into the market at one time – invest progressively in equal proportions every month or quarter, over perhaps 12 months. This will reduce the possibility of investing shortly before an abrupt fall in prices. And you will average-out your buying costs.

2. Buy in market dips: This volatile market will inevitably produce dips in prices. Cassidy and Oliver say this is a time to buy.

Oliver suggests that a strategy is for investors who are drip-feeding their way back into the market – as discussed in strategy one – is to progressively buy more stock during market dips.

3. Keep gearing at cautious levels: Reserve Bank statistics show the outstanding debt on margin share loans is on the rise again – after falling from a record high to a long-time low in the GFC fallout.

A particular danger now is getting carried away with market optimism and taking excessive debt, which caught out numerous investors during the bear market.

4. Consider mixing an index fund and direct-share strategy: Among the biggest beneficiaries of the market rebound to date, have been investors in low-cost, market-tracking index funds.

But with the highest gains from this recovery surely behind us, more investors may decide to use the strategy of investing in both index funds to replicate a chosen market and carefully-selected direct shares and/or actively-managed share funds.

In Patkar's view, this a stockpicker's market after the extraordinary gains with particular opportunities for investors who are highly selective. (Platypus Asset Management is an active funds manager.)

One of the risks with stockpicking of course is selecting duds yourself – or not having a professional adviser or fund which succeeds in its stockpicking.

Cashed-up investors wanting to re-enter this market could consider using an index fund as the core of their share portfolios and direct shares/and or actively-managed funds as "satellites". The performance of your widely-diversified core portfolio should mirror the market.

This core/satellite approach is a safer way of re-entering the market than relying on a small number of selected shares. This would be particularly the case for inexperienced investors who are uncertain about where to invest.

Many more investors are turning to low-cost exchange traded funds (ETFs) that track a chosen market such as the S&P/ASX300 as the core of their portfolios. ASX figures show the market capitalisation of exchange traded funds listed on the local market rose by 150% in the 12 months to March 31.

5. Look to potentially winning sectors for direct-share component of your portfolio: Market professionals believe that certain sharemarket sectors will standout at this stage of the recovery. Here are a few suggestions of Cassidy, Patkar and Oliver.

Oliver: "We are very positive in resources given the China growth story." He expects resource company earnings to rapidly increase. And he also points to the consumer discretionary sector such as electronic retailers (which should benefit from increasing employment and household wealth); airlines (with the stronger Australian dollar keeping fuel prices down and rising passenger numbers); and telcos (given share prices have fallen so much).

Cassidy: Sectors that he is "comfortable" with include mining, mining services, banking and media.

Patkar: "Health care is an outstanding source of out-performance, depending on the dollar." He specifically includes Sonic Healthcare, Cochlear and ResMed. Patkar also points to consumer discretionary (naming JB HiFi and David Jones, praising their business models); and banks ("powered through crisis" and should reverse bad-debt position over next 18 months or so).

http://money.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=1043390

Share clubs: learning together

By Gillian Bullock, ninemsn Money

The lessons learnt from a share market correction can prove invaluable for the many investment clubs around Australia. Those that can ride market volatility are the survivors.

But that's the point — share clubs are in the main all about learning … and there's a lot to learn from market downturns.

As Kerrie Brown of LIPS (Ladies Investment Portfolio Syndicate), which has been running for 11 years, says, "An investment club is for learning, not for making huge amounts of money."

But of course you can make money. Indeed, Brown says her club has enjoyed an annualised return of 14 percent [prior to this year's market correction] and that was "despite making some doozie mistakes".

Another long-running investment club is Sheba Investment Network. Frances Beck says her club has posted returns of up to 30 to 35 percent a year following a range of basic investment techniques, including willingness to sell when the investment reaches a predetermined amount and reinvesting all profits and dividends.

Beck and three of her fellow club members have just launched their book The Money Club, which provides information on establishing and running a club.

A key to success is for members of the club to have common goals. According to the Australian Stock Exchange, clubs that fail within 18 months are those that have disagreement among members on an investment strategy.

That's not to say a strategy cannot evolve over time. For instance, Beck says, "Our strategy has changed over the years, with a consolidation of our investment portfolio to fewer, larger stocks. We have sold out of our non-performing shares and now concentrate on stocks which deliver earnings and dividends." The club's portfolio includes AMP, Argo, BHP, Rio, Alesco and Bank of Queensland.

Similarly, LIPS changed its strategy over the years and now no longer invests in speculative stocks. "Our best purchase was the small Queensland company Campbell Bros that we bought at $4 to $5 and it's now trading around $29," says Brown. Most investment clubs have a partnership structure. You cannot have more than 20 partners otherwise the club would be classified as a managed investment scheme and you would need to issue a prospectus. And all members need to be actively involved in the club otherwise the non-active partners may be deemed to be receiving advice from the active partners who would then need an advisory licence to operate.

According to Beck, the best number of members is fewer than 12. Sheba Investment Network at one stage had 15 members but that proved unwieldy. The club now has six members.

LIPS, meanwhile has eight members, five original while the other three joined a long time ago.

Half the point of an investment club is the social aspect, but you should still pay meticulous attention to taking minutes at every meeting so that there are no arguments down the track about which shares you buy and how much you pay for them. And you need to keep records for tax purposes. Most clubs meet monthly — any less frequently and you could miss buying opportunities.

Success lies in buying at the right time. Brown says she and her partners were "rubbing our hands together when the market recently dropped as we hadn't been buying for a while".

Most clubs require a contribution of $50 or $100 a month.

Before you set up a club, get advice. The Australian Stock Exchange (http://www.asx.com.au/investor/education/investment_clubs/) has some good guidelines but you can also check out The Money Club website (www.themoneyclub.com.au).

Given you are buying and selling shares, you need to register your club, acquire a tax file number, open a bank account and file an annual tax return. But with the legalities out of the way, a share investment club can be a lot of fun.

http://money.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=304466

Applying to US colleges

Star Education Fair
Sunday October 10, 2010

Applying to US colleges

By TAN SHIOW CHIN
educate@thestar.com.my

The application process to American universities requires much research, preparation and hard work.

IT IS not an easy process to apply to a university in the United States.

For one thing, there is no centralised admissions agency like our UPU (Universities Admission Unit) or the United Kingdom’s UCAS (Universities and Colleges Admissions Service).
JOHN: Do a self-assessment and identify your passions and goals.

For another, applicants have to take specific tests like the SAT (Scholastic Aptitude Test), TOEFL (Test of English as a Foreign Language) and GRE (Graduate Record Examination), on their own as part of the entry requirements for undergraduate and postgraduate degrees.

Each US university — or college, as they are called there — also has its own application fee, and requires essays on certain topics as part of the admissions process.

While the Malaysian-American Commission on Educational Exchange (Macee) in Kuala Lumpur does offer educational counselling services to those intending to apply for US universities, much of the process relies on the applicant’s own initiative, research and organisational skills.

In a recent workshop called “Navigating Your Way through the University Selection Process” at the commission, Macee Educational Advising Centre coordinator Doreen John advised applicants to determine their priorities.

“Who are you? What do you want to study? Do a self-assessment and identify your passions and goals.

“Think about your personality. Are you a reserved person? Which, for example, might make it difficult for you to connect with people on a large campus. Or are you an extrovert, who mixes around easily?” she asked the audience.

John pointed out that one big advantage of the US tertiary system is that students have to take subjects unrelated to their major across different faculties.

“If you’re not sure what you want to do, it’s okay, because you have to take courses from different departments, as well as your own department.

“So you have the opportunity to explore what you want to major in.”

She added that the system enables students to obtain a more well-rounded education.

Factors like accreditation, recognition by professional bodies, location, climate, cost of living and competitiveness also need to be considered by students when selecting the colleges to apply to.

In terms of ranking and competitiveness, John advised: “You may get into MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) or Stanford (University), but will you do well there?

“Think about yourself — you want to have a good education, but not a nervous breakdown!”

She shared that the type of college life one has will vary depending on campus size, from the close-knit communities of about 700-1,000 students to the large campuses of around 55,000 people.

After taking all these factors into consideration, students should have a shortlist of about five to 10 institutions to apply to.

In a later workshop called “Rock-Hard Apps: Building Solid Applications to US Universities”, John said that there were three important sections in the application package.

They are: the application form, which is usually submitted online through the university website; hard copy documents, including educational transcripts and recommendation letters; and test scores like the SAT and TOEFL that are sent straight to the various institutions by the agencies that conduct them.

“Take note of the deadlines, that’s very important!” she reminded the audience, adding that there are different deadlines for different parts of the package.

She was joined at the workshop by American expatriate Jay Getz, whose younger son recently applied for US universities, as well as international admissions officers from Bryant University, Rhode Island, and Messiah College, Pennsylvania, who were in town for an education fair.

Getz ran through the application procedures using the Common Application form, which is used by 414 universities in the US for undergraduate admissions.

He said that although the thousands of other institutions in the US have their own individual application forms and processes, most would have similar requirements to the Common Application.

This includes information about the applicant’s personal and family details, academics, extra-curricular activities, as well as essays by the applicant.

“Two questions that often come up in the application are: what can you contribute to the university as an individual, and what can this university do for you?” said Getz.

John F. Eriksen from Bryant University also advised the audience: “The essays are the time to talk about something other than the numbers (test scores and academic results).

“Show your passion, or that you are trying to find one.

“Even if you have a diverse group of interests and are not an expert in any, it can show that you like to take risks and try new things.

“Your application is not the time to be humble. We want to see that you are involved and participate in the community around you.”

He added that the essays are also judged for the applicant’s writing skills.

Cindy Blount from Messiah College added that the essays really have to be well-written.

“Not only should you spell check it, you should have at least three people read through it for content, grammar and spelling — preferably, people who know you well and can tell if the essay reflects you as a person.”

She added that common mistakes include writing the wrong college name and writing something that is not consistent with the rest of the application.

She also reminded students that they need to send a hard copy of their documents to the institutions they are applying to, even if they have already emailed in soft copies of the documents.

“And send them via FedEx or DHL or any courier service that can track your package. Local mail may not always be the most reliable (method),” she said.

Getz also advised applicants to have an application matrix where they can list down important information related to their applications.

“You can make up your own, using Microsoft Excel or any spreadsheet programme.

“This is to help you keep track of all the things you need to do in the applications process.”

Among information that should be included in the matrix are the various deadlines for the application package, the items that need to be submitted for the application, and a contact in the admissions office to follow up on the application.

As he said early in his presentation: “Luck is opportunity and preparation.”


http://thestar.com.my/education/story.asp?file=/2010/10/10/education/7136299&sec=education

Australia's 10 best businesses

Australia's 10 best businesses

Greg Hoffman
October 5, 2010 - 2:59PM
Computershare is one of the five businesses to make it onto The Intelligent Investor's 10 Best Businesses list two years running. It's produced impressive figures; 40 per cent annual dividend growth over the past decade, a return on capital in the mid-teens and a return on incremental capital (the additional capital that's been put in over the past decade) of more than 20 per cent.

So why has the company's share price lagged the All Ordinaries index over the past 10 years?
In a word, ``expectations''. A decade ago, after a staggering 36-fold increase over the prior five years, investors were paying a price-to-earnings ratio (PER) of more than 100 for Computershare.

A PER much above 20 requires decent profit growth in order to justify it; at over 100 it had become extremely stretched. That fact that investors who paid those tech boom prices have been able to achieve positive returns at all is remarkable enough.

Finest businesses

In what's now an annual, post-reporting season ritual, our team has recently crunched the numbers and arrived at a list of the finest businesses listed on the Australian sharemarket.

It's a subjective exercise, of course, but the process we think is quite robust. Starting with all of the stocks in the ASX 200 index, we passed them through analytical filters such as
  • 5- and 10-year dividend growth, 
  • 10-year average return on capital employed and 
  • return on incremental capital employed.

Share price performance is not one of the measures: if a business performs well on the measures we've selected, its share price is bound to take care of itself.

Computershare is perhaps the exception that proves this rule. It's the only one of the 10 businesses to make our final list whose total shareholder returns have failed to beat the market over the past decade. As renowned investor Ben Graham put it, in the short run the market is a voting machine, in the long run it's a weighing machine.

Competitive advantage

In analysing the final list of Australia's 10 Best Businesses, a number of themes emerged. The most important is that the key to great long-term investment returns is some form of sustainable competitive advantage.

This might be in the form of a strong brand like David Jones, a powerful distribution network of the likes of Woolworths and Metcash, or patented technology from a company like Cochlear. Yes, all these stocks made it onto the list of Australia's 10 best businesses.

Sometimes a competitive advantage can be built by reliably delivering results to clients over a long period, as is the case with Leighton and Monadelphous. But this is potentially a weaker type of advantage and one that could be lost more readily than other kinds.

Also, over a short period (say one to three years), it's difficult to distinguish between profits that are the result of a strong competitive advantage and profits that are the result of a powerful industry upswing.
Another point to consider is that a strong competitive advantage often doesn't last. Recently, shareholders of Tattersalls and Tabcorp have learned this the hard way. Exclusive government licences provide a strong advantage but they have a finite life and most of the `excess value' they generate will probably be competed away in the new licence bidding process.

Each year we find it useful to survey the investing landscape from this long-term, numbers-driven perspective. And, if you're keen to work through such calculations yourself, I'm currently recording a `how to' online video series, using Telstra as a case study. The first two videos are available now, and I'll be posting the others later in the week.

This article contains general investment advice only (under AFSL 282288).

Greg Hoffman is research director of The Intelligent Investor. BusinessDay

 http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/business/australias-10-best-businesses-20101005-165i0.html

Warren Buffett says in future Wall Street chiefs should go broke - and their wives

Warren Buffett, the billionaire investor, has hit out at pay practices on Wall Street, attacking the lack of reform despite two years passing since the financial crisis struck.

Warren Buffett says in future 'Wall Street chiefs should go broke'
The 80-year old billionaire said: 'Wall Street does a lot of good things and then it has this casino.'
 
"People have a propensity to gamble, and it gets made easier and easier for them," Mr Buffett told a conference in Washington DC yesterday. "One of the problems we still have is we have unbalanced incentives for managers of huge financial institutions." 
 
In future, chief executives of banks who need government assistance should "go broke", said Mr Buffett. Their wives "should go broke, too", he added.
The prospect of another round of bank bonuses is likely to inflame public opinion in the US, where the broader economic recovery is flagging.

Banks have been forced to split off some of their riskier trading activities because of the Dodd-Frank law - the financial reform act signed into law in the summer - but critics say it does little to remove the incentives to pursue short-term profits. 

Mr Buffett's company, Berkshire Hathaway, is a major investor in American banks, with a stake in Goldman Sachs and Wells Fargo.

The 80-year old billionaire, who runs the company out of Omaha, Nebraska, with his long-term colleague Charlie Munger, said "Wall Street does a lot of good things and then it has this casino. It's like a church that's running raffles on the weekend." 

As in Britain, banks are keen to counter an impression that they are failing to do enough for the recovery. Goldman Sachs, for example, last week began an advertising campaign designed to show its role in helping create jobs.

Despite the difference in the fortunes of those on Wall Street and many Americans in other industries, analysts have said that banks may decide to cut jobs in coming months as trading revenues decline. Meredith Whitney, for example, has forecast that up to 80,000 finance jobs could go over the next 18 months.
Mr Buffett also told Fortune magazine's Most Powerful Women conference that investors are "making a mistake" if they chase a rally in bonds. The price of US two-year government bonds has raced to a record high this week as investors see little to spark a more robust recovery. 

"It's quite clear that stocks are cheaper than bonds," Mr Buffett said. "I can't imagine anyone having bonds in their portfolio when they can own equities." 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/8044789/Warren-Buffett-says-in-future-Wall-Street-chiefs-should-go-broke-and-their-wives.html

KLCI highest Dividend Yielding Stocks

FTSE Bursa Malaysia KLCI 30 (Malaysia) highest dividend yielding stocks top 30