According to Regulation T, you can make as many day trade (round trip) stock purchases using a cash account as long as you have the funds to cover each and every round trip sale. However, the funds generated from the sales cannot be used again to purchase new stocks until the settlement period (T-2 or T-3) is over. For example, say you have $10000 dollars in your cash account and no securities. You buy 1000 shares of XYZ stock in the morning at one dollar per share and you sell the stock 30 minutes later because it went up say by 50 cents. According to Regulation T, you cannot use the money generated from the sale of your 1000 shares until after the settlement date. However, you can use the remaining $9000 dollars in your account to execute other trades just as the first trade. You can do this as many times as you want as long as you have funds available to pay for the transaction the same day it's executed. The only thing to worry about and that isn't clear, is, what happens if you perform this action more than 3 times in a week? Does it mean that your cash account now becomes a margin account subject to margin account rules because you executed more than three round trip trades in a five day rolling period?


My small business has developed a relationship with a larger branch of a regional bank. I generally work on site or at home, so when I need a space for interviews etc. I just call the bank and reserve the meeting room there.


"> With about 10 minutes in front of google you could probably answer everything you just asked. So after reading a vague, rambling blog post, my immediate reaction should be to google some of the vague points for 10 minutes in order to make sense of it, rather that just dismiss it as badly written blogspam and ignore it? >The value of anyone's opinion should be weighed in regards to what they've done as a person or professional up to that moment in time. I've no idea what she's done and I don't particularly care. It appears she sells training materials (though exactly what is a bit vague) and it's not really my industry so I don't really feel like looking into it further. But the OP about start-ups being a ""long con"" is way off. I can only make a judgement from there. Who are you? Her fucking cheerleader or something?"


> Vimovo was created using two readily and cheaply available generic, or over-the-counter, medicines: naproxen, also known by the brand name Aleve, and esomeprazole magnesium, also known as Nexium. > The Aleve handles your pain, and *the Nexium helps with the upset stomach that’s sometimes caused by the pain reliever*. > You can walk into your local drugstore and buy a month’s supply of Aleve and Nexium for **about $40**. For Vimovo, the pharmacy billed my insurance company **$3,252**. The stomach pain that's *sometimes caused* by the other drug? For an over 8000 per cent markup? I'll take the Nexium, or the even-cheaper Prilosec, thanks. And since the stomach pain is only sometimes, maybe a lot of us don't even need the bundled pain killer. WTF. The doctor in the article claims he didn't know the medication he prescribed was so expensive. With the costs of medications these days, I think doctors should at least be aware of drugs they prescribe when they cost thousands of dollars - especially if there's a cheap counterpart. > [Drug maker] Horizon says the high price is justified. In fact, the drug maker wrote in an email, “The price of Vimovo is based on the value it brings to patients.” I hope Horizon gets as much hate as Martin Shkreli and Turing Pharmaceuticals did. EDIT: Fixed mixed-up drug names.


Home care services help our elders to live on their own home and get all type of daily help they need. They provide services like bathing, grooming, dressing, and meal preparation, housekeeping etc. Home care services are a great option not only for seniors but also for their families who always want the best for them.


If I open and fill an ISA, then leave the account alone for an entire year, will I then be able to add an additional £[Insert ISA limit here] to the original money I put in the account? Yes, you can. Will the full sum of £[Last years limit] + £[This years limit] that is in the account have interest paid on it? Yes, it will. Will the account be closed at the end of the period regardless? No. The account would only be closed if you requested it to be closed. Otherwise it would sit there with the original balance in it earning interest at the stated rate. The only way I can see an ISA being of any worth is by building up a substantial amount this way, but you would need so much cash laying around to max the ISA year on year. Just think of an ISA as like a completely normal savings account except that you don't pay tax on the interest, and there is a limit to how much you can deposit in any given year. Right now, while interest rates have been low for a while, the savings rates on any account (including ISAs) are not desperately attractive; additionally, with the recent changes to how interest on normal savings accounts are taxed, ISAs are not quite such a big deal as they used to be. If you look back to a time when interest rates were around 5%, a higher rate tax payer with £50,000 in a normal savings account would earn £2500 interest in a year, on which they would pay £1000 in tax. That made an ISA a very attractive option indeed.


It would be nice if the broker could be instructed to clear out the position for you, but in my experience the broker will simply give you the shares that you can't afford, then freeze your account because you are over your margin limit, and issue a margin call. This happened to me recently because of a dumb mistake: options I paid $200 for and expected to expire worthless, ended up slightly ITM, so they were auto-exercised on Friday for about $20k, and my account was frozen (only able to close positions). By the next Monday, market news had shifted the stock against me and I had to sell it at a loss of $1200 to meet the margin call. This kind of thing is what gives option trading a reputation for danger: A supposedly max-$200-risk turned into a 6x greater loss. I see no reason to ever exercise, I always try to close my positions, but these things can happen.


They will include the rental income into the calculation. They don't give you a 100% credit for the income because they have to factor that you might have a gap between tenants. Years ago they only credited me with 66% of the expected monthly income. Example: This expense was then supposed to come from the 10% of my income that was allocated for monthly non-principal mortgage loans, e.g student loan, auto loan, credit card debt...


If you bought a Barbi doll for a 6 year old boy who obviously doesn't want it and won't play with it, would you say the toy is bad? That same toy would be perfect for many 6 year old girls. School being paid for and given to kids that don't want it doesn't mean it's a bad system, just that some have no interest in using it.


You can take out a personal loan for any reason - to burn the money for fun, if you like. But be aware that you owe it back, not your mother, or anyone else. They will come to you for the repayments.


And therein lies the solution to 'studios charge per ticket.' If studios got a cut of food and drink instead, ticket prices could plummet back to barely covering A/C and janitorial services, and more butts would hit more seats holding more already-overpriced snacks.


"It doesn't matter if the terms are a ""fair deal"" or are ""too good to be true"" — either way, it's definitely a scam. They are ""phishing"" for your personal information, including your banking information, and have no intention of giving you a loan. How can I tell? Simple: all such offers like this everywhere are scams. There is no economic situation other than being a scammer to do this. Why would an individual put out their money to strangers at such a high risk for even a much, much higher purported return? They wouldn't."


I think firstly you need to make a list of things you need to shop and make a list of websites which are offering good deals for the items you want to purchase. You can use vouchers collected from previous purchases. Call the sellers for the listed items and see if you can negotiate a better deal. The reason you need to do this - you may not get great deals for the items you intend to purchase during or after Christmas/Boxing day/New year/. My answer start looking out from today.


As much as you would like to believe in American exceptionalism, I am afraid it is has come to an end. The Jews you love so much have taken over your government and sucked it dry, all you have is debt between your Treasury and your Jewish Fed. They will tax what little you have left. And then eventually history will replay its self in its inevitable cycle. What does America export, beside financial goobly gook and weapons, little else that is not made cheaper and better every where else and thats why you have a trade deficit. You can't even build a decent fucking car anymore. Your youth is no longer educated and your nation is now perpetually so stoned they don't have a fucking clue what is happening around them. You are involved in wars you cannot win, paying with money you do not have, trying to destabilize the Middle east and Muslim countries because the very same Jews that have infested you Political and economic system want to annex more land. You have no moral , religious, social or ethical structure left, in fact you no longer know whether your children should grow up as men or women or neither or either. Every world leader is laughing at you and openly making fun of you and now that you are exposed as supporters of ISIS and ISIL and whatever you want to call them, are leaving you and your alliances. Your government is openly corrupt and takes bribes from lobbyists and in the end the Biggest fucking moron that your country could produce has been installed as your president, regardless of who you voted for or wanted. Your President has only one fucking skill, declaring Bankruptcy and that is why he was chosen, to first insulate the Global economy from your Fed driven soon to be hyper inflated dollar and then bring the abomination straight down in another controlled demolition. You think you are coming out of this . . . .now that is wishful thinking


"First off, with startups, forget that you know about common structures of debt and equity. Just try to think of this money as a generic ""investment"" that meets the investors risk and return objectives. Startups are unique in that they are high risk but generally have almost no assets or security for an investor. Investors generically want two things: 1) Return and 2) Limited Risk. Without speculating too much: consider that the investor might be viewing the return component as the 30% equity and the 8% dividend and he views the risk management component as the additional 30% equity, until repaid. A different way of looking at this might be that the investor would require an equity stake greater than 30% with greater than a 8% dividend if he did not get the initial investment back in return for the reduced stake. In other words, this structure is debt and equity because that is what the investor can demand. Maybe you can get around this by offering a higher equity stake or offering something else although this structure is common because it aligns interests of the investor and the startup."


"I think you are asking about actively managed funds vs. indexes and possibly also vs. diversified funds like target date funds. This is also related to the question of mutual fund vs. ETF. First, a fund can be either actively managed or it can attempt to track an index. An actively managed fund has a fund manager who tries to find the best stocks to invest in within some constraints, like ""this fund invests in large cap US companies"". An index fund tries to match as closely as possible the performance of an index like the S&P 500. A fund may also try to offer a portfolio that is suitable for someone to put their entire account into. For example, a target date fund is a fund that may invest in a mix of stocks, bonds and foreign stock in a proportion that would be appropriate to someone expecting to retire in a certain year. These are not what people tend to think of as the canonical examples of mutual funds, even though they share the same legal structure and investment mechanisms. Secondly, a fund can either be a traditional mutual fund or it can be an exchange traded fund (ETF). To invest in a traditional mutual fund, you send money to the fund, and they give you a number of shares equal to what that money would have bought of the net asset value (NAV) of the fund at the end of trading on the day they receive your deposit, possibly minus a sales charge. To invest in an ETF, you buy shares of the ETF on the stock market like any other stock. Under the covers, an ETF does have something similar to the mechanism of depositing money to get shares, but only big traders can use that, and it's not used for investing, but only for people who are making a market in the stock (if lots of people are buying VTI, Big Dealer Co will get 100,000 shares from Vanguard so that they can sell them on the market the next day). Historically and traditionally, ETFs are associated with an indexing strategy, while if not specifically mentioned, people assume that traditional mutual funds are actively managed. Many ETFs, notably all the Vanguard ETFs, are actually just a different way to hold the same underlying fund. The best way to understand this is to read the prospectus for a mutual fund and an ETF. It's all there in reasonably plain English."


> Support of Trump has always been unpalatable to most on the left but now it's unforgivable. good. i really hope the left keeps doubling down on the hateful rhetoric and the violence. it shows the world the true side of the tolerant left.


If you are in search of the top Bridal Makeup In Navi Mumbai, then contact with Manali Beauty spa Training Academy which also offers the training classes or diploma courses by the expert beauticians. We also provide Professional training in Hair Dressing. To know more explore the full blog.


Robinhood seems interesting. Some say it's a gimmicky site with a nice UI not an investing or trading platform. From investopedia: 1. For now, the app stays afloat for mainly two reasons. First, the business itself is extremely lean: no physical locations, a small staff, no massive public relations campaigns and only one operating system platform to maintain. Robinhood also generates interest off of unused cash deposits from user accounts according to the Federal Funds rate. 2. Second, venture capitalists such as Index Ventures, Ribbit Capital, Google Ventures, Andreessen Horowitz, Social Leverage,and “many others” have invested more than $16 million in the app. 3. According to Barron’s, Robinhood plans to implement margin trading in 2015, eventually charging 3.5% interest for the service. E*Trade charges 8.44% for accounts under $25,000. Phone assisted trading will also be available at $10 per trade in the future. 4. Originally, Robinhood planned to make money off of order flows – a common tactic used by discount brokerages in the 1990s to generate revenue. According to the company's FAQ, Robinhood backpedaled on the idea because it executes orders through a clearing partner and, as a result, receives little to no payment for order flow. The company is willing to return to its original plan in the future if it receives order flows directly or begins to generate a lot of revenue from them.


You're not missing any concepts! It sounds like you are contributing a piece of collateral to the business, and you want to know a fair way to value how much this contribution of collateral is worth. Technically the economic answer would be the difference in interest between a secured loan and an unsecured loan. So for example suppose that the business could get a loan at 17% without the collateral (maybe just on a credit card) but with the duplex as collateral it is able to get the loan at 10.5%. In principle, the value of this collateral is (17% - 10.5%) or 6.5%, because it has allowed the business to pay 6.5% less interest on its loan.


Birthdays are all about fun ‘n’ frolic and when it comes to birthday parties for girls in Houston and Katy, trust Princess & Tiaras Spa celebrations to be the best bet. We offer some of the coolest ideas to make the birthday of your little princess a gala affair.


"The difference between me and Uncle Sam is that Uncle Sam gets the lowest interest rates in the world. If I could borrow money at 1.7% for 10 years you bet your ass I'd do it! Also, the notion that ""Uncle Sam is running out of people to borrow from, and is having trouble paying those loans back (and the interest)"" is just false. US treasuries are the most sought after debt in the world. If anyone had any doubt uncle sam would pay them back, interest rates would be skyrocketing, not at historic lows. After that quote I turned it off, about two minutes in. This is just more FUD designed to get you to buy gold or whatever. Ignore it."


I've seen an increasing number of writeups about this. Some peers think people just use more credit cards nowadays (instead of cash for instance), and that it's normal. I'm not buying it. I think this is a serious problem and I'm wondering how we're going to see this play into the US economy moving forward. Also, if anyone knows how the EU is doing with credit card debt, I'd be grateful for any data points.


My experience has been that they are expecting all damage to be covered as best as possible. They may withhold the remaining funds until you prove the work was done. Any money leftover is yours as long as they accept your proof. Be careful they don't withhold so much that you aren't able to get a full repair, and try to get paid directly as most repair companies wanted to inflate the costs while letting me know they would handle the transaction. No thanks.


"It is not clear to me why you believe you can lose more than you put in, without margin. It is difficult and the chances are virtually nil. However, I can think of a few ways. Lets say you are an American, and deposit $1000. Now lets say you think the Indian rupee is going to devalue relative to the Euro. So that means you want to go long EURINR. Going long EURINR, without margin, is still different than converting your INRs into Euros. Assume USDINR = 72. Whats actually happening is your broker is taking out a 72,000 rupee loan, and using it to buy Euros, with your $1000 acting as collateral. You will need to pay interest on this loan (about 7% annualized if I remember correctly). You will earn interest on the Euros you hold in the meantime (for simplicity lets say its 1%). The difference between interest you earn and interest you pay is called the cost of carry, or commonly referred to as 'swap'. So your annualized cost of carry is $60 ($10-$70). Lets say you have this position open for 1 year, and the exchange rate doesnt move. Your total equity is $940. Now lets say an asteroid destroys all of Europe, your Euros instantly become worthless. You now must repay the rupee loan to close the trade, the cost of which is $1000 but you only have $940 in your account. You have lost more than you deposited, using ""no margin"". I would actually say that all buying and selling of currency pairs is inherently using margin, because they all involve a short sale. I do note that depending on your broker, you can convert to another currency. But thats not what forex traders do most of the time."


That’s simple not true. What you pay your employees is directly associated to what it costs for said employees to live. You can pay a professional employee $80k in Milwaukee and they will be happy, and you won’t be able to find the same anywhere near the same professional employee in NYC for $80k.


I'm familiar with the quote. The institution you donate to can keep you anonymous. The person actually benefiting is not aware of your generosity. This is how I understand the biblical meaning. By the way, a number of people who donate, do not take the tax deduction, so as to not benefit. To them I suggest they calculate the refund, and add that to their donations the next year.


FYI...during the housing boom here in the US many people spoke about ever increasing home prices. Many thought home prices could never go down. Until they did. If it seems like it is impossible for home prices to continue to go up then they probably will stop going up at some point, although the rising prices can continue for a lot longer than you think possible. I'm wondering if Malaysia is feeling the effects of the US FED which flooded the market with US dollars after the crisis. The Malaysian central bank holds US dollars as its foreign exchange reserves. In order to keep the ringgit from rising against the dollar the Malaysian central bank will print up ringgit to purchase dollars which suppresses the value of the ringgit. This has the effect of artificially lowering interest rates as ringgits become readily available leading to a boom - the boom being in real estate. Just a hunch. Is the dinar in Kelantan getting much attention in Malaysia? This is starting to make a little news here.


The GlobalTradeConnect contains a Maximum number of wholesale product categories and you can choose from thousands of wholesale companies on our Business 2 Business directory. The expression business to business industry is used for an E-Commerce, which basically enhancement the businesses.From buying an item, then getting it all the way to ending the scope, everything occurs online without any actual connections.Hence, B2B market segments can principally be described as websites, which are made and used for business to business.


Yeah, after watching his stream it did change my opinion of him. Went from hating him like most people in this thread to liking him. He's a very reasonable person just likes to troll lol. You can watch one of his presentations where he makes a valid argument when confronted by a Harvard professor: https://youtu.be/NE9PEpy-JI4


The cycling visit in Transylvania you'll get the opportunity to visit Romina World Heritage Sites, for example, the invigorated places of worship from Canada. The visit interchanges cycling and strolling days for you to get the most ideal cycling in Transylvania Romania, a one of a kind place that influenced it on Lonely Planet's to top locales to visit in Romina. We're the same than most by far of the mountain biking in Transylvania Romania on the planet, slanting toward all the more riding on trails.


They are flame broiled, then put on a bun and places in a steam warmer, they are pretty warm when they come out (helps to soften the buns a bit too). There are only a few things they microwave before sending out usually. Its been awhile (over 15 years) since I worked there, but I am sure the process is pretty much the same.


> The issue is that they aren't leaving, they're using a loophole to avoid paying corporate taxes even though their revenue, operation, manufacturing, and logistics base is still primarily within the United States. They're obeying the law to the letter. Whose fault is it that you don't like the law? The company's, or the government's?


">If we could provide medicine, food, clothing, shelter, and internet access to every person in the country, then it hardly matters how callous and Randian the employment market is. We can already provide medicine, food, clothing, shelter and internet access to every person in the country, for your implied price of more-or-less free. Our GDP per capita versus our prices is high enough that a basic income program and a universal health-care program could pretty much *solve* the fundamental economic problems of life (in the ""how do I not die on the street?"" sense). Capitalism in the Randian sense *is what stops us from doing so*."


I feel something needs to be addressed The last 100 years have been a period of economic prosperity for the US, so it's no surprise that stocks have done so well, but is economic prosperity required for such stock growth? Two world wars. The Great Depression. The dotcom bust. The telecom bust. The cold war. Vietnam, Korea. OPEC's oil cartel. The Savings and Loans crisis. Stagflation. The Great Recession. I could go on. While I don't fully endorse this view, I find it convincing: If the USA has managed 7% growth through all those disasters, is it really preposterous to think it may continue?


Pipes works demand regular checkup and maintenance by trained professional that you can find in Miami FL plumber. Technically speaking, pipes fittings are nothing but the objects used for attaching two or more pipelines. As per plumbers in Miami FL, there are different sorts of fittings available on the market and you need to pick just those that are suggested for your pipes components and pipeline patterns.


I would argue for another type of lottery not mentioned that still denies trades but makes it impossible for a trade to improve on satisfaction. Basically shift from school level lotteries to student level lotteries. You use a lottery to rank all students, such that the students are ranked 1 through N. Where N is the total number of students. Student number 1 gets their top choice school. Student X gets their top school that's not already filled up. This student level, instead of school level, lottery then guarantees that it's impossible for a pair of students to trade and both get a better choice than what they got from the lottery.


I will take Obama with an unbroken job creator record despite a deliberate GOP NO policy in Congress over George Bush and Herbert Hoover's massive job destruction any time, any day, any minute. As for regulations - industry after industry have failed to self regulate effectively leaving state and federal government the onerous task. All it takes are a few companies in an industry to systematically break the rules for cost-cutting advantages relative to their competitors - and self regulation goes awry as in BP and Halliburton in the Gulf and all the small businesses hiring illegal immigrants and thus encouraging the illegal practice.


Nope, not a Moto G, it's a new budget model with the name Moto E. I'll see if I can link to it on a sec. *edit [Here's the link]( http://www.motorola.com/us/consumers/shop-all-mobile-phones/Moto-E/moto-e.html) I just bought the plain black one, but it's kind of neat that they make interchangeable colorful backs if that's something you're into I guess.


"Note that an index fund may not be able to precisely mirror the index it's tracking. If enough many people invest enough money into funds based on that index, there may not always be sufficient shares available of every stock included in the index for the fund to both accept additional investment and track the index precisely. This is one of the places where the details of one index fund may differ from another even when they're following the same index. IDEALLY they ought to deliver the same returns, but in practical terms they're going to diverge a bit. (Personally, as long as I'm getting ""market rate of return"" or better on average across all my funds, at a risk I'm comfortable with, I honestly don't care enough to try to optimize it further. Pick a distribution based on some stochastic modelling tools, rebalance periodically to maintain that distribution, and otherwise ignore it. That's very much to the taste of someone like me who wants the savings to work for him rather than vice versa.)"


It is indeed not comparable. Companies move faster from one state to the next than from one country to the other. The company can move, or the activities can move. This is a quick win in your local economy. It's not sustainable but it can give the local economy a temporary boost, en then the economy can grow in a sustainable way. But if it doesn't work on a state level, and one state cannot make it economy grow by attracting activities from other states, then how can a country do it? I mean, it does work to some extend, look at Ireland for example, but it's not a perfect scheme, look at Ireland for example.


Just saw the video. I think there will be less incentive for businesses and governments to allow automation to reach a point where the majority of the population is out of work. It's not hard to imagine why any economic system that puts automation above everything can end up in disarray. Excess automation will trigger the law of diminishing returns to kick in. In end the system will have to regulate itself to survive. Example: pro-automation gvt and businesses increase investment in automation. Margins increase which leads to more spending and investment. More workers are laid off. The standard of living increases in the short-run. As more workers are getting laid off aggregate demand decreases and spending decreases leading to a recession. The glut of production dampens the market further. Standard of living decreases. Income disparities between disenfranchised workers and sponsors of automation increase. Anti-automation movements commence, social conflict ensures. Production grinds to a near halt as unrest increases. Now two things are possible either pro-automation gvt gives in to the pressure and introduce labor reforms abolishing full automation to allow job creation or they are ousted in a social revolution and an anti-automation gvt takes over, automation is kept in check.


We have been providing high quality gold and silver plating service for over 60 Years. Using the highest quality materials and state of the art technology we offer quality finish. Our highly experienced technicians can meet any demand and complete the job in no time. With our reasonable pricing and fast turnaround, we provide a very cost effective service.


The short answer is the drafting got kind of fucked up in the bill, and confessional and state republicans were able to launch lawsuits challenging the provision as unconstitutional, and have got a favorable ruling from a conservative district court, the district court's order has gotten stayed pending a slow moving appeal. Trump has the power to flip the governments official position and say he agrees with the district court and won't enforce pending the appellate ruling. The case is a tough one because the plain language reading differs pretty starkly with the clear intent.


This is business as usual, except that you need to keep in mind that the corporate entity is separate from the individual. As such - all the background checks and references should be with regards to the actual renter - the corporation. You should be cautious as it is not so easy to dissolve an individual (well... Not as easy, and certainly not as legal), as it is to dissolve the corporation. So you may end up with a tenant who doesn't pay and doesn't have to pay because the actual renter, the corporation, no longer exists. So check the corporation background - age, credit worthiness, tax returns/business activity, judgements against, etc etc, as you would do for an individual.


"Here's a tip, man. If you find yourself starting a sentence ""I'm not racist, but..."" or ""I'm not homophobic, but..."" or ""I'm not sexist, but..."", just stop before you get to the ""but..."" part. It almost always proves the first half of your sentence incorrect. In this case, you finish the sentence with a generalization of women, that three women will create drama whereas three men will not. That is sexist. If someone said the same thing regarding hiring black people, you would probably consider that racist, right?"


Get in touch with a competent company that offers stone restoration solutions if you are looking for professional sandstone polishing services. Such companies understand that each rock is different and thus, offer services accordingly to provide the best results.


But why not call it economic hardship, cause that is what it is. Using strong negative words loosely (like slavery, racist (don't want to get into the 'racist' debate but it still serves as a good example)) as if you do they loose the strength of their definitions. She CAN change her life in a positive way, slaves couldn't. It'll be hard but doable. And if she chooses to work at a dead-end job that it HER choice. If she likes it more power to her, I'm not one to judge what makes her happy, but don't you dare come asking for help when you can change. Show me the progress you're making and I'd gladly help. You don't help a druggie who continuously shoots up, you help the ones who help themselves get better, not continue to swim in the mess they made.


Worthwhile article. Long but very good read. Interesting how only until recently were wiretaps being used. I heard about this from a friend- it took an outsider to the white collar crime division to get them to start pushing for wiretaps, and until they did that, they werent able to get anyone at all.


CPSL is your experienced partner for medical translations. It has translated close to 80 million words in multiple languages in the past few years alone. For more information visit: 745 Atlantic Avenue, 2nd Floor, Suite 253, Boston, MA 02111, USA or call us at: +1 408-600-0707 Company Name: CPSL Address: 745 Atlantic Avenue 2nd Floor, Suite 253 Boston, MA 02111 United States of America Phone: +1 408-600-0707 Email: info-usa@cpsl.com Webiste: http://www.cpsl.com/gb/sectors/medical-healthcare/


Here is a list of threads in other subreddits about the same content: * [With Economy Almost ‘Home,’ Poloz Is Treading Carefully on Rates](https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/78s86h/with_economy_almost_home_poloz_is_treading/) on /r/Economics with 3 karma (created at 2017-10-26 09:08:13 by /u/lingben) ---- ^^I ^^am ^^a ^^bot ^^[FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/DuplicatesBot/wiki/index)-[Code](https://github.com/PokestarFan/DuplicateBot)-[Bugs](https://www.reddit.com/r/DuplicatesBot/comments/6ypgmx/bugs_and_problems/)-[Suggestions](https://www.reddit.com/r/DuplicatesBot/comments/6ypg85/suggestion_for_duplicatesbot/)-[Block](https://www.reddit.com/r/DuplicatesBot/wiki/index#wiki_block_bot_from_tagging_on_your_posts) ^^Now ^^you ^^can ^^remove ^^the ^^comment ^^by ^^replying ^^delete!


You conveniently missed the part where I said THEY'RE THE BEST SELLING CAR IN THEIR CLASS. They literally have more demand than they can produce for the next 5+ years. The reason they're posting losses is because they can't reinvest their money fast enough to keep up with their demand growth. Are you going to argue that because Amazon posted a $126 million loss last quarter they are not as valuable of a company as the Mom & Pop book store down the street that barely broke even? I will reiterate: I don't think you understand how business works.


"An option is an instrument that gives you the ""right"" (but not the obligation) to do something (if you are long). An American option gives you more ""rights"" (to exercise on more days) than a European option. The more ""rights,"" the greater the (theoretical) value of the option, all other things being equal, of course. That's just how options work. You could point to an ex post result, and and say that's not the case. But it is true ex ante."


"I'm not sure of the theological basis against usury in sharia law. IIRC, sharia forbids excess compensation, and the modern interpretation of this includes interest. Rules about banking are common in religious faiths. The Catholic church viewed interest as the ""selling of time"", and since time is a force controlled by god, charging interest was a heretical practice. For private transactions, modern Islamic banking is a relatively new phenomenon that emerged in the postwar period. I don't think this method of banking is a ""house of cards"", it's just different. Some US states, like California, also subject lenders to higher levels of risk. (ie. borrowers can walk)"


Thanks for explaining added value - I do not think professors are much, if any part of the problem, it really does come down to cost in my eyes. Year over year costs go up. As a country we are pricing ourselves out of education. It will continue to create disparity and eventually you will have a large segment of the population saying no way on college (I can get a lot of free courseware on edx.org and other sites). As numbers drop colleges are going to be hard pressed to really make money. I often ponder what that money is spent for. I know a chunk goes to sports and other not necessarily academic activities. I have advocated for years to people who cannot afford to go to a 4yr college to attend community college, get an Associates and make their decision from there. With exception of the Ivy league schools I do not think there is enough value in 4 yr degree's in the job market. I am in IT and the number of people I have worked with who have had degrees since the early days of my career has dropped greatly. Many of them had non-computer degrees and jumped job fields to fill gaps early on. Just my two cents. I really believe that most professors are not the problem (unless they are paid huge sums and even that's dependent on a lot of things)


The most important thing to remember is that being VAT registered, you must add VAT to every bill, so every bill will be 20% higher. If the bill payer is a company, they don't care because they deduct the 20% VAT from their own VAT bill. If the bill payer is a private person, their cost of your services has just gone up by 20% and it is going to hurt your business. So the question is, what kind of customers do you have? But if your customers are companies, then the flat rate scheme mentioned above is very little work and puts a nice little amount of extra cash in your pocket (suitable if your bills are mostly for your work and not for parts that you buy for the customer and bill them for).


I would like to post a followup after almost a quarter. littleadv's advice was very good, and in retrospect exactly what I should have done to begin with. Qualifying for a secured credit card is no issue for people with blank credit history, or perhaps for anyone without any negative entries in their credit history. Perhaps, cash secured loans are only useful for those who really have so bad a credit history that they do not qualify for any other secured credit, but I am not sure. Right now, I have four cash secured credit cards and planning to maintain a 20% utilization ratio across all of them. Perhaps I should update this answer in 1.5 years!


"Often the counter-party has obligations with respect to timelines as well -- if your buying a house, the seller probably is too, and may have a time-sensitive obligation to close on the deal. I'm that scenario, carrying the second mortgage may be enough to make that deal fall through or result in some other negative impact. Note that ""pre-approval"" means very little, banks can and do pass on deals, even if the buyer has a good payment history. That's especially true when the economy is not so hot -- bankers in 2011 are worried about not losing money... In 2006, they were worried about not making enough!"


"Several things the book specifically recommends are either things no actual counterparty to a deal would agree to, or outright illegal. For instance, one of his sage-like pieces of advice is to put a clause in your contract saying ""subject to the approval of all business partners"". Then if you feel like backing out, you claim that your cat is your business partner and he didn't like the deal. I am not making this up. The book's central tenet of ""buy income producing assets"" is a good one. However other than a general recommendation of real estate, it does nothing to specifically help you achieve these goals."


I used to trade power for a closed end hedge fund. Yes, weather derivatives are very important. They help power traders / utilities hedge for unaccountable variables, IE weather. For example, lets say it costs a utility $50 an hour to produce power for the load when it is 80 degrees outside. Lets say I trade the contract with them to guarantee the weather will be under 80 degrees. If the weather is higher than 80 degrees, more people turn in their AC, the load on the grid goes up, and the utility has to start generating power at $70 an hour. Under this contract, I would be liable to pay the utility the net difference in their cost (the additional $20 per hour they generate per mw). In that case I am a loser. If the power comes in under 80 degrees, I make money as I priced (sold) the contract at a premium according to the risk I calulated for offereing the contract. This has many many applications, but yes, its not a weird thing to trade. Hope this helps.


"I think the problem is that you've made a math error. This child would not be costing you 300 per month, it will be costing you 1400 per month. 1100 of this is in a donation of salable hours rather than cash, but helpfully you have a number right there as to how much someone is willing to pay for these hours so the math is still doable. So, if you are indeed splitting your expenses fifty-fifty, you should chip 1100 into the pot to match your wife's contribution. It would make the most sense, I think, to have your part of this contribution cover some of your mutual expenses, and if any is left over, save it up for the day that your child would cost more than that 300 in a month - when you need extra clothes, or have to replace something they destroyed, or want to pay for extra opportunities (camps, educational games, lessons), or a a savings that can be used for major future expenses (higher education, first car, milestone celebrations, safety net when starting out). Of course, if your family is indeed a priority, you might consider making an equal investment in your family - say, half your income (1800) to match half her time going into the building of the family. After all, the decision to start a family should be an investment of time and value, not just a minimum bid for expenses. And again, any extra can be spent on mutual expenses, saved up for future costs, or left as your child's ""savings"" for major expenses or safety net. I suppose I should mention that you perhaps could get away with covering half her contribution (550 per month, on the face of it), as that should also ""balance"" out the monthly expenses. Even this much would be enough to put her back into the green on her covering her own costs. Of course, in this case you might want to take into account that while she's working 38,5 hours per week now, running a household is, I've heard, more closely equivalent to a 60-hour week, plus or minus being ""on call"" for a further 100 hours a week. Trying to calculate the absolute minimum payment on your part to match the investment of hours on hers is likely to be a bit more tricky than just matching the salable hours not worked, if you're set on income ratios and splitting costs ""as they are"". Also, you might want to rethink your criteria for sharing income completely or what makes certain divisions of costs ""unfair"". You mention one reason it would be unfair is that you have a ""more stressful job"" - well, your job may well be more stressful than her job now, but it is likely to be less so than raising a child (her new job). As for investment of time and energy for your education entitling you to a larger amount of pay, again, raising a child is likely to be a larger investment of time, money, and anxiety than your education, but her pay (or even share of the costs) doesn't seem to be balanced in response. I'm not gonna tell you what is fair, that's for you to work out, just suggesting you really think it through before deciding what would be fair or not."


Some of the information on the HUD-1 form would have been useful to complete the income tax paperwork the next spring. It would have had numbers for Taxes, and interest that were addressed at the settlement. It is possible it is mixed in with the next years tax information. If I needed a HUD-1 form from 15 years ago, I wouldn't ask the real estate agent, I would ask the settlement company. They might have a copy of the paperwork. They might have to retrieve it from an archive, so it could take time, and they could charge a fee. The local government probably doesn't have a copy of the HUD-1, but they do have paperwork documenting the sale price when the transaction took place. I know that the jurisdictions in my area have on-line the tax appraisal information going back a number of years. They also list all the purchases because of the change in ownership, and many also list any name changes. You probably don't want a screen capture of the transactions page, but the tax office might have what you need. This is the same information that the title search company was retrieving for their report. Question. Is there going to be capital gains? For a single person there is no gains unless the increase in price is $250,000. For a couple it is $500,000. I am ignoring any time requirements because you mentioned the purchase was 15 years ago. I am also assuming that it was never a rental property, because that would require a lot more paperwork.


Short time horizon, small pot of money, and low appetite for risk? That smells like low return situation to me. I guess it depends on how low your appetite for risk is, though. You could open a brokerage account (free) and purchase $10K worth of a fully diversified ETF like VTI, optionally putting maybe 20% of it in a diversified bond ETF. I consider that a reasonably conservative investment, but if you are of the mindset that you cannot tolerate a drop in your wealth, it's not going to work. Plus if you don't have any other investments, this will be the thing that requires you to report capital gains to the IRS, and that paperwork is never fun. As an alternative, you have CD's, which will make you very little. Or a high-ish interest rate electronic savings account like Capital one 360 or Emigrant Direct (there are probably newer ones now that outcompete even these). Still, with anything in this paragraph you will be lucky to beat inflation. The real interest rate was negative last time I checked, so every risk-free investment will lose money in purchasing power terms. To beat inflation you will need to take on nonnegligible risk.


Don't sell. Ever. Well almost. A number of studies have shown that buying equal amounts of shares randomly will beat the market long term, and certainly won't do badly. Starting from this premise then perhaps you can add a tiny bit extra with your skill... maybe, but who knows, you might suck. Point is when buying you have the wind behind you - a monkey would make money. Selling is a different matter. You have the cost of trading out and back in to something else, only to have changed from one monkey portfolio to the other. If you have skill that covers this cost then yes you should do this - but how confident are you? A few studies have been done on anonymised retail broker accounts and they show the same story. Retail investors on average lose money on their switches. Even if you believe you have a real edge on the market, you're strategy still should not just say sell when it drops out of your criteria. Your criteria are positive indicators. Lack of positive is not a negative indicator. Sell when you would happily go short the stock. That is you are really confident it is going down. Otherwise leave it.


You clearly have no understanding of how the corporate tax code works, so I won't waste my time explaining it. Guess what, they do pay taxes...but lobbyists over the years have made it pretty easy for them to pay as little tax as possible. The logic is pretty clear: remove the special interest loopholes and tax corporations at a globally competitive rate (we have the highest corporate rate among developed countries), more companies shift their production back to America and don't store their profits in foreign holding companies with near 0 rates. More money flows back in to country, r&d goes up, more jobs are created, more Americans are employed in meaningful jobs, wages go up, the govt makes up for whatever lost corporate revenue with the increased personal income tax.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.reuters.com/article/us-markets-oil/oil-ends-on-a-low-after-halving-in-2014-as-opec-stands-aside-idUSKBN0K905620141231) reduced by 76%. (I'm a bot) ***** > NEW YORK - Oil prices fell on Wednesday to a 5-1/2-year low and ended with their second-biggest annual decline ever, down by half since June under pressure from a global glut of crude. > Weekly U.S. data showed crude oil stockpiles fell more than expected, but inventories at the oil hub at Cushing, Oklahoma, grew, keeping prices depressed. > Oil prices have collapsed this year as the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries opted to maintain the same level of output despite a global glut caused by expanding U.S. shale output and diminished demand growth from China. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/759rn2/the_triggering_factor_for_the_oil_price_drop_in/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~224918 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **Oil**^#1 **Price**^#2 **U.S.**^#3 **crude**^#4 **low**^#5"


"This is the biggest blunder I see in money handling. ""Oh I'm a good person and everyone knows my intentions are good. And they're really happy with me right now, so it'll stay that way forever, right? So I can just do anything and they'll trust me."" And then in hindsight 10 years later, the person realizes ""wow, I was really stubborn and selfish to just assume that. No wonder it blew up."" Anyway, to that end, your requirement that all the money be in one account and ""this will simplify taxes"" is horsepuckey. No one will believe a legitimate financial advisor needs that, but it's exactly what a swindler would do. And that's the problem. If anything goes wrong, their trust in you will be forgotten, some will say you intended to scam all along, and the structure will be the first thing to convict you. Money makes everyone mistrusting. Ironically, the concept is called a ""trust"", and there's a wide body of law and practice for Person X responsibly handling the money of Person Y. The classic example is Person Y is a corporation (say, a charity) and Person X is on the Board of Directors. It's the same basic thing. The doctrine is:"


"I haven't seen anyone mention it, but everyone here seems to be dumbfounded that Chipotle would start serving queso in the first place. Where I'm from, the main competitor to Chipotle is Qdoba. When I ask people why they prefer Qdoba, the answer has never not been ""queso"". I don't think that they are dropping chorizo in favor of queso, but rather they're making two separate competitive business decisions. Eliminate the opponent's advantage (queso) and mitigate a weakness (non-selling product)."


"I disagree, the article is clear that it isn't necessarily the fault of the individual, or their spending habits. > Certainly we can all do the hard work of cutting back on our expenses, says Tescher. But she says the results of this study show something more structural than individual spending. > ""People are spending a shockingly large amount of income on housing. They have to pay for transportation to get to a job. These costs are going up while their wages stay the same."""


Chinese growth ALWAYS tops forecasts. And it is bullshit. Because if you are in charge of a region, and you report less than predicted growth, your future is very sad indeed. So, you just report the growth that central government wants to hear.


In a lot of professional fields the choices are work full time or leave the industry. Many people don't have an option to work slightly less because of how employment contracts are structured. If working 4 days per week for 80% of my salary was an option, I'd jump at that opportunity.


"Good read, and the sad truth is that our generation those of us under 30 will be paying for the ""greatest generations"" mistakes. I know I have and will continue to prepare to be self reliant. Although I am no tea party member it is time to slash spending and bring jobs back to America."


Lets see if ViolentAcrez is a TROLL, what does that make Brian Moynihan, or Sheldon Yellen, or any one of the other 100-200 people who have been sucking this job market dry for the last 10 years and the headline news on CNN is about a TROLL on a message board, maybe some of yo dumb asses should be letting your daughters wear that jail bait outfits period, and maybe the NEWS CREWS should be focusing on the ECONOMY and the GREEDY FUCKS WHO HAVE BEEN BLEEDING IT DRY FOR YEARS??? Don't worry, we are addin' all the NEWS CREW CEOS especially and including gawkers. FTW. http://contact-the-ceo.com/searchbyname.html http://contact-the-ceo.com/searchbyname.html http://contact-the-ceo.com/searchbyname.html


"This is a legal issue, or possibly an ethical issue, and not really a finance issue. And I am not a lawyer. But for what it's worth: Did you sign a written contract with H&R Block? If so, then the terms of that contract would govern. If you signed a contract saying that you agree to file your taxes through them if they meet such-and-such conditions, and they met these conditions, then you are legally obligated. If there was no written contract, then I think any court would take the conversation between you and H&R Block as an oral contract. If H&R Block said, basically, ""Okay, we'll calculate what we think your taxes are, and if we come up with something better than what you had before, then you agree to file your taxes through us"", and you said ""Oh, okay"", then that's an oral contract. You agreed to their conditions. Legally, oral contracts are just as binding as written contracts. The only difference is that it is difficult to prove exactly what was said. If you really did agree to these conditions, I suppose you could lie and say you didn't and then try to convince a court that they are the ones lying. Obvious ethical problems there. There are also implied contracts. If HRB's advertising or paperwork says that you're agreeing to file through them if they meet the conditions, I thing that a court would likely rule that you implicitly agreed to their terms by doing the review. In any case, when you go to some place like HRB mostly what you are paying for is their knowledge and expertise. So if they give you the benefit of their expertise -- they tell you how to reduce your taxes -- and then you don't pay them, that seems rather unethical to me. The situation is muddied by the fact that you paid $100 for the review. Is that paying for the basic information, the ""tax tip"", and paying for them to file is then a contract for additional work? Under some circumstances I'd say yes, that's additional work and thus an additional contract, so in the absence of a contract obligating me, I don't have to do that. The catch in this case is that at that point they must have already pretty much taken all your information and filled out all the forms. All that's left is to press the ""send"" button and submit the return, right?"


"It appears that you already know this, but FICO credit scores (as controlled by Fair Isaac Corporation) are the real official credit scores, and FICO takes a cut on their production no matter which of the 3 major credit bureaus calculates the official score (all using slightly different methods). Be careful when obtaining a score for making a big decision that it is a FICO score, because relatively few lenders will lend based on a non-FICO score. That said, some non-FICO scores are easy to obtain and can be roughly translated to an approximation of your score. Barclays US/ Juniper Bank credit cards offer a free Transunion ""TransRisk""(TM) score. The TransRisk score is a 900 point scale, while the FICO score is an 850 point scale. This is a simple ratio and you can calculate your approximate FICO score by the formula:"


Yeah, the past 4-5 years have been rough on fundamental guys (not to say companies like AAPL didn't fare well), but EVERYTHING has been macro. When correlations go to 1 across the board and central bank legislation has have a bigger impact on earnings than new products/good mgmt/etc. it's hard to be a fundamentalist. Like your style, this market environment is ripe for HF's though that can use leverage/hedges/and short-term positioning to create alpha while the mutual funds are stuck in long-term structured investment objective ruts and reduced risk. Not to say you can't create alpha through selecting better/undervalued stocks, it's just been damn near impossible the last 5 years to do it.


Have you looked at conventional financing rather than VA? VA loans are not a great deal. Conventional tends to be the best, and FHA being better than VA. While your rate looks very competitive, it looks like there will be a .5% fee for a refinance on top of other closing costs. If I have the numbers correct, you are looking to finance about 120K, and the house is worth about 140K. Given your salary and equity, you should have no problem getting a conventional loan assuming good enough credit. While the 30 year is tempting, the thing I hate about it is that you will be 78 when the home is paid off. Are you intending on working that long? Also you are restarting the clock on your mortgage. Presumably you have paid on it for a number of years, and now you will start that long journey over. If you were to take the 15 year how much would go to retirement? You claim that the $320 in savings will go toward retirement if you take the 30 year, but could you save any if you took the 15 year? All in all I would rate your plan a B-. It is a plan that will allow you to retire with dignity, and is not based on crazy assumptions. Your success comes in the execution. Will you actually put the $320 into retirement, or will the needs of the kids come before that? A strict budget is really a key component with a stay at home spouse. The A+ plan would be to get the 15 year, and put about $650 toward retirement each month. Its tough to do, but what sacrifices can you make to get there? Can you move your plan a bit closer to the ideal plan? One thing you have not addressed is how you will handle college for the kids. While in the process of long term planning, you might want to get on the same page with your wife on what you will offer the kids for help with college. A viable plan is to pay their room and board, have them work, and for them to pay their own tuition to community college. They are responsible for their own spending money and transportation. Thank you for your service.


> Of course it is, but people can't live in 7.50 an hour anymore. So have 5000 people who would otherwise be on 7.50 an hour get 0 instead? The finance/economics aspect of this was clear from day one, and it's a no brainer that jobs will get cut even in a leftist city like Seattle. It's not a short term thing either - there's no reason for the long run equilibrium to be any different.


That number may be based on a long term historical view of the stock market. If you look at some long term charts for the DOW or the S&P500, you'll see that overall the upward trend is pretty good. However there are some pretty huge flat spots in those charts, and if the majority of your investements have been made during one of those periods, you may not have seen a lot of growth. If you look at periods between 10-17 years or so, you can find places where it would have really sucked to be you (look at the S&P chart and imagine 66 to 83.. OUCH!) and places where things were stellar. If you expand to about say 30 years or so, then it's hard to find a period without at least some good growth in there somewhere. If you panicked during a downturn and sold on the low, things of course get much worse. How your own portfolio has done will depend a lot on how the funds you chose have done, how much you put into equity vs fixed income, and if the fixed income was in actual bonds, or a bond fund.. Bond funds are subject to a lot more fluxuation as interest rates rise or fall than something like a t-bill or i-bond that you own outright and plan to hold to maturity.


"what an asshole. here's the line he's hoping you won't read too closely ""By 2002, Fannie and Freddie had bought well over $1 trillion of subprime and other low quality loans."" BOUGHT as in private lenders made the loans and then sold them to Fannie or Freddie. As 60 minutes recently documented many of the megabanks were routinely forging income statements and pushing people toward loans they knew they could not afford. Yes Fannie and Freddie contributed by providing a convenient place for the bankers to stuff their fraudulent loans but even the trillion he speaks of is a drop in the bucket compared to the size of the derivatives market the banks built on top of the subprime loans. He's either a fool or a shill and probably a little of both"


"Well, I know for a fact, some of my flat-earth ultra religious science denying 9-11 truther friends and extended family claim it's a step closer to Armageddon. The company who offered to implant RFIDs into their employees was a ""mark of the beast, the time's a coming""."


It's calculated from the day you take it to the day it's paid in full, and as Dilip noted, there's usually a fee of a percent or two for cash advance. Given the situation, the new job and need for cash, I'm not so worried about a few hundred dollars interest, nor the very short term minor ding on your credit. Credit scores have components that are long term, such as missed payments, and those that are nearly real time, like utilization.


"Writing a put for a stock means you are selling the right to sell you stock. Simply put (er no pun intended), ""writing put options"" means you are selling somebody else the right (a contract) to sell YOU a specific stock at a specific price before a specific date. I imagine the word ""write"" to refer to the physical act of creating a contract. The specific price is called the STRIKE and the specific date is the EXPIRATION. By ""writing a put"", you are agreeing to purchase the stock at a particular price (the STRIKE price) before the expiration. You get paid a fee, the ""premium"", for agreeing to purchase the stock at the strike price if asked to. If the holder of the contract decides to make you buy the stock at the strike price, you have to do it. If the stock never dips below the strike price, then the holder of the put contract (a contract you wrote), will never exercise their right because they'd lose money. But if the stock drops to zero, you could potentially lose up to your strike price (times the number of shares at stake), if the holder of the contract decides to exercise. Therefore, ""writing puts"" is a LONG position, meaning you stand to gain if the stock goes up. FYI - ""LONG"" refers direction (UP!), not duration."


Only taken in Malaysia, I think I'll be fine. I'm also going into my senior year of hs and this is a big attraction on the college apps, so I wouldn't be too upset if it didn't work out.


Facebook is dying. Give it a year or so. The most avid users I know are deleting their accounts. Facebook have started texting updates and sending emails to get people back. Any idea where the money is coming from? - countries?


"Putting a dollar amount on the valuation of a start up business is an art form that often has very little at all to do with any real numbers and more to do with your ""salesman"" abilities when talking with the VC. That said, there are a few starting points: First is past sales, the cost of those sales and a (hopefully) realistic growth curve. However, you don't have that so this gets harder. Do you have any actual assets? Machinery, computers, desks, patents, etc. Things that you actually own. If so, then add those in. If this is a software start-up, ""code"" is an asset, but without sales it's incredibly hard to put a value on it. The best I've come up with is ""How much would it cost for someone else to build it .. after they've seen yours"". Yes, you may have spent 5,000 hours building something but could someone else duplicate it, or at least the major parts, in 200 hours after seeing a demo? Use the lower number. If I was you, I'd look hard at my business plan. Hopefully you were as honest as you can be when writing it (and that it is as researched as possible). What is it going to take to get that first sale? What do you actually need to get there? (hint: your logo on the side of a building is NOT a necessary expense. Nor is really nice office space.) Once you have that first sale, what is the second going to take? Can you extrapolate out to 3 years? How many key members are there? How much is their contribution worth? At what point will you be profitable? Next is to look at risks. You haven't done this before, that's huge - I'm assuming simply because you asked this question. Another is competitors - hopefully they already exist because opening a new market is incredibly hard and expensive; on the flip side, hopefully there aren't that many because entering a crowded market is equally hard and expensive. Note: each are possible, but take radically different approaches and sums of money - and $200k isn't going to cut it no matter what it is you are selling. That said, competition should be able to at least point you in the direction of a price point and estimate for how long sales take. If any are publicly traded then you have additional info to help you set a valuation. Are there any potential regulatory or legal issues? What happens if a key member leaves, dies or is otherwise no longer available? Insurance only helps so much if the one guy that knows everything literally gets run over. God help you if this person likes to go skydiving. I bring risks up because you will have to surmount them during this negotiation. For example, asking for $200k with zero hard assets, while trying to sell software to government agencies assuming a 3 week sales cycle will have you laughed at for naivety. Whereas asking for $10m in the same situation, with a team that has governmental sales experience would likely work. Another big question is exit strategy: do you intend to IPO or sell to a competitor or a business in a related category? If selling, do you have evidence that the target company actually buys others, and if so, how did those deals work out? What did they look for in order to buy? Exit strategy is HUGE to a VC and they will want to make several multiples of their money back in a relatively short amount of time. Can you realistically support that for how much you are asking for? If not then going through an Angel group would be better. They have similar questions, but very different expectations. The main thing is that no one knows what your business is worth because it is 100% unproven after 2 years and is therefore a huge financial risk. If the money you are asking for is to complete product development then that risk factor just went up radically as you aren't even talking about sales. If the money is purely for the sales channel, then it's likely not enough. However if you know what it's going to take to get that first sale and have at least an educated idea on how much it's going to cost to repeat that then you should have an idea for how much money you want. From there you need to decide how much of the business it is worth to you to give up in order to get that money and, voila, you have a ""pre money valuation"". The real trick will be to convince the VC that you are right (which takes research and a rock solid presentation) and negotiating from there. No matter what offer a small percentage of the business for the money you want and realize you'll likely give up much more than that. A few things you should know: usually by year 3 it's apparent if a start-up is going to work out or not. You're in year 2 with no sales. That doesn't look good unless you are building a physical product, have a competent team with hard experience doing this, have patents (at least filed), a proven test product, and (hopefully) have a few pre-orders and just need cash to deliver. Although in that situation, I'd probably tell you to ask your friends and family before talking to a VC. Even kickstarter.com would be better. $200k just isn't a lot of money and should be very easy to raise from Friends or Angels. If you can't then that speaks volumes to an institutional VC. A plus is having two or three people financially invested in the company; more than that is sometimes a problem while having only 1 is a red flag. If it's a web thing and you've been doing this for 2 years with zero sales and still need another $200k to complete it then I'd say you need to take a hard look at what you've built and take it to market right now. If you can't do that, then I'd say it might be time to abandon this idea and move on as you'll likely have to give up 80%+ to get that $200k and most VCs I've run into wouldn't bother at that level. Which begs the question: how did the conversation with the VC start? Did you approach them or did they approach you? If the latter, how did they even find out about you? Do they actually know anything about you or is this a fishing expedition? If the latter, then this is probably a complete waste of your time. The above is only a rough guide because at the end of the day something is only worth what someone else is willing to pay. $200k in cash is a tiny sum for most VCs, so without more information I have no clue why one would be interested in you. I put a number of hard questions and statements in here. I don't actually want you to answer me, those are for you to think about. Also, none of this shouldn't be taken as a discouragement, rather it should shock you into a realistic viewpoint and, hopefully, help you understand how others are going to see your baby. If the VC has done a bit of research and is actually interested in investing then they will bring up all the same things (and likely more) in order to convince you to give up a very large part of it. The question you have to ask yourself is: is it worth it? Sometimes it is, often it's not."


Answering my own questions here after doing a bit more reading: If my account grew $100 last month, do I have to wait five years to withdraw that $100 for a first-time home purchase? No, as long as the account is at least five years old. Do I have to pay taxes on that $100? No.


what other pieces of info should I consider If you don't have liquid case available for unexpected repairs, then you probably don't want to use this money for either option. The 7% return on the stocks is absolutely not guaranteed. There is a good amount of risk involved with any stock investment. Paying down the mortgage, by contrast, has a much lower risk. In the case of the mortgage, you know you'll get a 2.1% annual return until it adjusts, and then you can put some constraints on the return you'll get after it adjusts. In the case of stocks, it's reasonable to guess that it will return more than 2.1% annually if you hold it long enough. But there will be huge swings from month to month and from year to year. The sooner you need it, the more guaranteed you will want the return to be. If you have few or no stock (or bond)-like assets, then (nearly) all of your wealth is in your house, and that is independent of the remaining balance on your mortgage. If you are going to sell the house soon, then you will want to diversify your assets to protect you against a drop in home value. If you are going to stay in the house forever, then you will eventually need non-house assets to consume. Ultimately, neither option is inherently better; it really depends on what you need.


If you are looking for some specific type of hosting as in the Minecraft one then you will have to first search for something that will work for you. Times have changed and so all you must do is get ahead and check out how you need to make things work.


It seems human nature would be the opposite: Hey, I have some loddars right now, I probably won't have some in the future, I should spend them on the things I *want* and *need* because in a few months *nobody* will be able to pay their debts, not just *me*. Sort of confirmation bias theory. No?


"For example, Biff Spoiles started an animation studio and production developing company to produce animations -- something in the ballpark of $12,000,000.00 U.S.D. -- and he had a $12K/yearly salary. I have no clue what you mean, as others have mentioned. (I'm not sure what the ""12 million"" refers to? Do you mean ""total cost of animations created by the company in a year"" or? If so, ""12 million"" would amount to say 5 to 20 major, brand name TV commercials, for example. Do you mean the ""cost of plant"" - so, for a ""TV commercial production company"" you mean purchasing desks, drawing pads, Porsches, and so on?) Your specific example of a ""film or TV-commercial production company"" is a bad example, it's not really a ""business"" - that is to say, it does not rely on capital and return on capital. The way famous ""film or TV-commercial production companies"" happens is precisely like this: A young guy/girl G (perhaps a designer or filmmaker) is working, just as you say, for a menial wage at a film company. (G got that first job perhaps out of art school.) G gets a chance at doing a photo shoot, animation, or helping direct a TV commercial. G does a fantastic job. Later that year, a large important animation or commercial job arrives at the company; due to the earlier excellent result, G is allowed to work on the new one. G again he does a fantastic job. Soon, within that company, G is a highly-regarded animator or director and has attracted fame amongst colleagues and clients. Eventually, G hears of a company (XYZ Hotel) that needs a TV ad made. (Or an animation, or whatever.) G says to XYZ, look, you could spend $230,000 with a production company, and in reality they'd have me direct it anyway. I'm leaving to work independently, so I will do your job for only $190,000. In a word, XYZ says ""Yes"" and hands over a cheque for $190,000. G spends $160,000 on the usual actors, cameramen, editing, etc, and uses 2 months of G's own time, and pockets $5000 after tax. G then doesn't get a job for a couple months, and then gets three more in the new year. Because the commercial for XYZ was so good, XYZ gave him another couple to do, for another product line. Eventually G has just enough money coming in that he ""hires"" a few freelance people for a few weeks here and there ... a cameraman, illustrator, gopher, and so on. Eventually G has enough TV ads solidly booked G can risk actually hiring long-time friend P as a producer. P spends most of her time actually bringing in more work - and it builds from there. Eventually. You have a very busy, well-known in the industry, TV commercial production company with many staff and endless clients (example, say, http://rsafilms.com) It might be at some point in there (say, around year three), G would like to borrow the odd million bucks to basically ""help with cashflow."" The answer to that is nothing more than ""through business contacts, G knows a wealthy dentist/whoever who is prepared to do that."" But note carefully that at that point, G's company is already very firmly established, famous for doing 20 spectacular animations/commercials, and so on. (Note too that 999 times out of 1000 when this happens, the money evaporates and the dentist D never sees a penny back. In that case G ""apologizes"".) Only much much later once the company has many, many staff and great cashflow, could the production company actually borrow from a bank, or perhaps from ""actual investors"", which is more what you have in mind. regarding your four categories. Numbers 1 and 3 are totally wrong; they do not work at all like you are asking. indeed the very simple answer is: ""borrow money"" to start a category 1 or 3 type of business. It's totally inconceivable. (The only exception would be if you literally just have an extremely rich Uncle, who loans you a few million to ""start an animation studio"" - which would be completely whacky. Because in that example: company XYZ could not care less if you ""have"" an animation studio (ie: your Uncle has given you a platinum card, and you bought a building, some drawing pads, and a few dozen Macs). XYZ just couldn't care less. All they care about is your folio of work. In this example, RSA would get the job :) ) My guess is you're thinking people somehow magically go around ""borrowing money"" to get businesses like that started. (Your examples 1 and 3.) The simple answer is they don't and can't - your fears are assuaged! :)"


"> What does it even mean for something ""to come out of IT's budget?"" From the IT managers perspective he has a budget of X dollars to allocate. When X dollars are spent that's it, he isn't allowed to spend any more. If unforeseen expenses are incurred (e.g. the computers for the new hires) and deducted from his budget that leaves a deficit that has to account for, usually by dropping something else he had previously though urgent enough to spend money on. How this is represented in the books is of no interest to the IT manager. His world view is limited to “I had X dollars, now I only have X-Y dollars.”"


> Taking rough rice as an example, there are millions (if not billions) of people who eat rice to survive. People will always need oil to fuel their cars. People will always need electricity. Commodity values are unlikely to go to 0, I agree. The fact you think this is super-relevant suggests to me you have not fully grasped the nature of the commodities futures markets. > I don't like to be too risky You are looking at getting into extremely risky securities. > I guess what I am trying to do is look into things that allow me to profit, regardless of where equities are going. Many men have died searching for the holy grail. Speculating in these markets is not for the faint of hearts, let alone for the risk-averse. > I have gone as far as to look through OTC ADRs to find some foreign value, and I found nothing. There are plenty of funds offering lots of exposure to international equities, which seem well-geared toward the individual investor.


"Here are a handful of measures I take myself: I check my credit reports once in a while and look for anything out of the ordinary. If somebody calls me on the telephone claiming to be from my bank or credit card company, utility, etc. I ask for their number, check it, and call them back. I don't give personal information to people merely claiming to be from a place I do business with. I never fill out ballots for free contests. Most of the time these are scams. When I get a call telling me ""you won a free cruise"" for a ballot I supposedly filled out at the mall, I say they're lying through their teeth. For excitement, I'll sometimes buy a lotto ticket instead. I'm careful when I surf the web. I don't give my personal information to web sites I can't trust. If they look the least bit shady, I'm out. Also, I use different passwords at different web sites. I avoid using a password from a public terminal, but when I must, I change my password soon after. I'm careful when I download software. I don't install anything I didn't get from a trusted source. I pay for software when necessary, so finding a trusted source is not hard. But, I've heard of people who – to save a buck – would download a pirated application from a shady warez site only to be ""gifted"" a trojan horse key logging or other spyware along with it. When I no longer need a bill, receipt, statement, etc. or any document containing personal information, I shred it, and I use a shredder that does a micro-cut, not just a strip- or cross-cut. The micro-cut remains go in the green bin with wet and yucky organic waste. When I no longer need a hard drive, I use a secure wiping tool like Darik's Boot & Nuke before reusing. If the drive isn't worth reusing, I'll wipe first then take apart with my Torx screwdriver. Once I have the drive platter, I scratch the heck out of it. Remains go to the community recycling depot. That's all I can think of right now; I probably missed a few :-) So, what do others do? I'm curious, too."


If you think of it in terms of trying to get an annual return on your investment over the long haul, you can do a simple net present value analysis to decide your buy price. If you're playing conservative with the investments and taking safety over returns, you will still have some kind of expectation of that return will be. Paying slightly more will drag down your returns, perhaps less than what you want to get. If you really want to get your desired X%, then stick to your guns and don't go down the slippery slope of reaching. If 1% off isn't bad, then 2% off isn't all that bad, and maybe 3% is OK too for the right situation, etc. Gotta have rules and stick to them. You never know what opportunities will be around tomorrow. The possible drops in value should be built into your return expectations.


"Whether your financial status is considered ""OK"" depends on your aspirations. You aren't spending more than you earn and have no debt. That puts you in the category of OK in my book, but the information in your post indicates that you would benefit from some financial advice--100 grand sounds like a lot of money to have in a bank unless you are on the verge of spending it. Financial advisors come in various shapes and sizes. Many will charge you a lot for what turns out to be helpful advice in the first meeting, but very little value-added thereafter. Some don't have the best incentives (they may be incentivized to encourage you to put your money into certain funds, for example). There are many financial advisors (of sorts) that you have access to that won't cost you anything. For example, if you have a 401(k) at work, I bet there is a representative from the plan administrator that will meet with you for free. If you open a brokerage account or IRA at any place (Fidelity, Vanguard, etc.) you can easily talk with one of their reps and get all sorts of advice. My personal take is to meet with anyone who will meet with me for free, but not to pay anyone for this service. It's too easy to get good advice and paying for it doesn't guarantee that you get better advice. Your financial situation will depend primarily on a few things you have not mentioned here. For example, How much are you setting aside for retirement and what are your retirement goals? This is something lots of people can give you advice on, but we don't know what market returns will be going forward so we don't really know. One bit of advice that may benefit you is how to set aside money for retirement in the most tax advantaged way. How much do you feel that you need saved up for large expenses? Thinking of starting a family? How many months worth of income are you comfortable having set aside? What is your tolerance of risk? If you put your money in risky assets, you may make more, but you may also actually lose money. Those are the questions a financial advisor will ask about. Once you have his/her advice--and preferrably after talking to a few advisors--you can make your own decision. Basically, your options are: Rules of thumb: Save only what makes sense to save in banks given your expected needs for cash. Put a lot in tax advantaged accounts (don't give Uncle Sam any gifts). Then look at financial and real investments. There are a number of free resources on the internet. For example FutureAdvisor. Or you can hit up the forums at BogleHeads. Those guys give and receive financial advice as a hobby. They aren't professionals, but you can get a lot of varying ideas and make up your own mind, which to me is better than (just) asking a professional. BTW, regarding the ESPP: these plans often give you a discount on stock and can therefore be a good idea. Just be sure you don't hold the stock longer than you need to. It's generally a bad idea to concentrate your wealth in any single investment, especially one highly correlated with your background risk (i.e., if the company does poorly you will already be worse off because you may lose your job or see fewer advancement opportunities. No need to add losses in your savings to that). 1 Please note: I am neither advocating nor discouraging buying guns, gold, or other controversial real assets. I'm just giving examples of items some people buy as part of their wealth-preservation strategy."


I'm not certain how well this would fit your needs but have you taken a look at PearBudget? It is a pretty detailed Excel template. https://www.pearbudget.com/spreadsheet


If you receive a loan from your parents, it is treated legally just as a loan fom a bank, or from any private person with spare money. You don't pay tax on a loan that you get from your bank (or your parents), and the bank (or your parents) don't pay tax when you repay the loan. If you pay interest, the parents will have to pay tax on the interest, just like they would have to pay tax if the money was in their own bank account. I would advice both you and your parents to make sure that a contract is signed saying that this is a loan, and how it is repaid, and that you follow the contract. Otherwise, if you or your parents treat the loan as an actual present, then you might have to pay tax, because there is tax due on gifts. And you might get a penalty for trying to avoid tax by declaring the gift as a loan. So pay the money back! Only up to £3,000 in cash gifts that a person gives each year is tax free, but the parents can use any unused money from last year (so they can give a gift of £6,000 if they gave nothing in the previous year), and it is per parent, so both the mother and father can make a gift.


I'm a bot, *bleep*, *bloop*. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit: - [/r/talkbusiness] [There's so much pain in agriculture that traders are leaving](https://np.reddit.com/r/talkbusiness/comments/77z4rb/theres_so_much_pain_in_agriculture_that_traders/) [](#footer)*^(If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads.) ^\([Info](/r/TotesMessenger) ^/ ^[Contact](/message/compose?to=/r/TotesMessenger))* [](#bot)


"It depends on the definition of earnings. A company could have revenue that nets in excess of expenses, so from that perspective a good cash flow or EBITDA, but have debt servicing costs, taxes, depreciation, amortization, that alters that perspective. So if a company is carrying a large debt load, then the bondholders are in the position to capture any excess revenues through debt service payments and the company is in a negative equity positions (no equity or dividends payable to shareholders) and has not produced earnings. If a company has valuable preferred shares issued and outstanding, then depending on the earnings definition, there may be no earnings (for the common stock) until the preferences are satisfied by the returns. So while the venture itself (revenues minus costs) could be cash flow positive, this may not be sufficient to produce ""earnings"" for shareholders, whose claim on the company still entitles them to zero current liquidation value (i.e. they get nothing if the company dissolves immediately - all value goes to bondholders or preferred). It could also be that taxes are eating into revenue, or the depreciation of key assets is greater than the excess of revenues over costs (e.g. a bike rental company by the beach makes money on a weekly basis but is rusting out half its stock every 3 months and replacement costs will overwhelm the operating revenues)."


> You actually have far less government than we do. What? He just said that his country has a strong safety net and universal health care. [If you look up a New Zealander's total tax burden]() it is 25% higher. How do you conclude that their government is smaller?


"> Income inequality comes from too much government intervention... Right, those Monopoly games all ended the way they did due to government interventions. > ...the divergence in income growth began around the same time as the increase in regulatory burden. Correlation does not prove causality. > Look up the Mercatus Center's regulatory growth studies. You think I'm going to accept studies about government intervention from a think-tank headed and funded by Koch Industries people and groups and self-describing itself as ""the world’s premier university source for market-oriented ideas""? Can you find something from a group that at least appears to be impartial?"


You have not mentioned the dates when you left India. Taxability is not depended on whether you transfer the funds to India or NOT. It is dependent on whether you are NRI for tax purposes for the given financial year. Refer to this question for more details Will it be taxable if I transfer money from UK account to India account? Edit: The lottery earnings are also treated in the same way. If you are NRI, you don't pay tax. Else you pay tax


"The answer depends on what else you'd do with that 2%. But first, let's look at some actual numbers. For simplicity's sake, let's say you have a £100k mortgage outstanding, your payment is £1000 per month, and you want to pay £1000 extra per month. 2% interest, compounded monthly for simplicity, so .02/12 = .00167% per month. (Your interest is probably compounded daily, but this simplifies the math and isn't too far off of it.) If you don't pay it off early, then first month, you'll owe £100167, minus £1000, so £99167. Second month, £99332 after interest, then £98332 after payment. So on and so forth. After 24th month (2 years), you'll owe £79613 after that 24th payment. So you've paid off £20,000 of balance, at the cost of £24,000; total interest paid, £3,613. If you do pay off another £1000, so you put a total of £2000 in per month, which is penalized (.02*1000=£20) each payment, for a total of £48,000 paid over the 24 months. After that 24 months, you have a balance of £55,637, so a bit over £44k paid off, at the cost of £48k; total interest and fees paid, £3,637. So, at the end of the 24 month period, you've paid an extra £24 in interest/fees than you would have otherwise. You of course have a lower loan balance at the end, but you haven't saved any money overall, and if you're just refinancing at this point into a new loan, you're no better off (and very slightly worse off), even assuming the money will just sit in your bank account and do nothing. I think with daily compounding interest it will be around the same or slightly better, but it's not a significant amount. Now, there is a third option, perhaps: pay £24000 (so after penalty, £23,520) on the first month. This is that whole extra £1000 per month, all up front, where it makes the most difference for interest. This does help, some: you pay £3,172 in interest, around £450 less. Sounds good to me, right? Except, you might be able to make more than £450 with that £24,000. £450 is 1.875% of £24,000, meaning you just need to make a 2% return on your money to beat out this option (and in fact, that's not surprising, given the 2% interest rate!). Investing in the market, even conservatively, is likely, though not guaranteed, to be beneficial; over a 2 year period it's fairly risky, though if you can think over 5-10 years, it's very likely to be substantially better. Even a 4-5% return (well below long-term market averages) will be quite a bit better, and the market's down quite a bit right now - so it might be even better than that - though it's still a risk. You can make a term deposit (looks like ""Fixed rate bond"" is the term), even, and at least break even - right now it looks like 1.9% is common for a 2 year term deposit in the UK. In total - my recommendation would be against paying off the mortgage early, particularly in this 2% interest rate period. 2% is around inflation levels, meaning you're not really paying any real interest, from one point of view. Once the rates are higher (4%+) then it may be worth considering. The exception here - basically the standard exception to these questions - is if you are otherwise going to spend the money on luxuries. In that case, you're better off prepaying the mortgage, at least from a personal finance perspective, if you can do so up front - but not if you're going to do it monthly. What is better for you personally in this regard is a question only you can answer, of course."


"Because the 1st 20 years of brainwashing was enough for me to say ""Take your raping priests, stupid folklore, and misguided values and fuck off."" And if you aren't christian, which I believe you are, than you are a child rape sympathiser. And if you aren't of the catholic persuasion, then you are being lied to at least, and conned at best. You can have your cult. I'll take the moral guidelines of Confucious and Socrates, thanks."


Glass half full: it means it's a great time to buy if you can afford the payments Glass half empty: it means there are not enough buyers because too many people are burdened with student loans and food services or preparation jobs


"You are co-signer on his car loan. You have no ownership (unless the car is titled in both names). One option (not the best, see below) is to buy the car from him. Arrange your own financing (take over his loan or get a loan of your own to pay him for the car). The bank(s) will help you take care of getting the title into your name. And the bank holding the note will hold the title as well. Best advice is to get with him, sell the car. Take any money left after paying off the loan and use it to buy (cash purchase, not finance) a reliable, efficient, used car -- if you truly need a car at all. If you can get to work by walking, bicycling or public transit, you can save thousands per year, and perhaps use that money to start you down the road to ""financial independence"". Take a couple of hours and research this. In the US, we tend to view cars as necessary, but this is not always true. (Actually, it's true less than half the time.) Even if you cannot, or choose not to, live within bicycle distance of work, you can still reduce your commuting cost by not financing, and by driving a fuel efficient vehicle. Ask yourself, ""Would you give up your expensive vehicle if it meant retiring years earlier?"" Maybe as many as ten years earlier."


"I'd say close them if they have fees, if you're worried about fraud or if you're going to be tempted to use them. It may have an affect on your credit rating, but it shouldn't hurt you seriously. Having too many cards gives you the ""opportunity"" to overspend, which obviously isn't good."


This seems like a great thread to direct me somewhere my girlfriend and I can discover what it would take to quit our 2 room (TV, DVR/Cable box) setup and with cheaper services that give us what we want. Instead of outlining the problem, I am wondering if there is a better subreddit than /business.


When you start confusing morality with legality is when you enable corporations to take advantage of you. Consider the scenario if the roles were reversed. If the bank owned money to *you*, do you think they would hesitate to default on that obligation for even a nanosecond if it was in their best interests to do so?


"There is no ""shortage"", what there is is a lot of untalented unskilled fakers who think they can skate their way through an I.T. career after 4 years at college. Because HR people can't tell the difference they have hired too many of the fakers and because management can't deal with the social differences that people who spend all day working with machines are going to have they have fired all of the true experts. The business world brought this situation upon itself because of arrogance and ignorance and it deserves all of the suffering that has resulted. Wages for high tech work have actually dropped by 50% over the last 10 years. If you folks want skilled computer workers to support your organizations again you need to increase average salaries by 200% and treat the experts with the respect we deserve."


">""...Lyft, consciously or not, had correctly identified Uber’s weakness years ago. Uber was unfriendly so Lyft would be friendly. Uber’s logo was sleek and silver and black and so Lyft’s would be a bright pink mustache. Uber’s vision of driverless cars sounded like Skynet. Lyft painted a picture of a world with wider sidewalks and more parks."""


Companies, especially big ones, find in Switzerland a business-friendly environment and often benefit from a special tax regime. Don't mix the companies interests with yours.


So you can earn $60-75 and your BF $55? You are in your 20's (based on your below comment about being 3 years into your career) with a combined income of 6 figures. That's fantastic. No kids, no accumulated cruft and you make a crap ton of money. An average house in the best school district where I live would run you about $300,000. You should be able to afford that, easily, before you are 30. Not sure why you seem to be down on your situation.


What you're referring to is the yield. The issue with these sorts of calculations is that the dividend isn't guaranteed until it's declared. It may have paid the quarterly dividend like clockwork for the last decade, that does not guarantee it will pay this quarter. Regarding question number 2. Yield is generally an after the fact calculation. Dividends are paid out of current or retained earnings. If the company becomes hot and the stock price doubles, but earnings are relatively similar, the dividend will not be doubled to maintain the prior yield; the yield will instead be halved because the dividend per share was made more expensive to attain due to the increased share price. As for the calculation, obviously your yield will likely vary from the yield published on services like Google and Yahoo finance. The variation is strictly based on the price you paid for the share. Dividend per share is a declared amount. Assuming a $10 share paying a quarterly dividend of $0.25 your yield is: Now figure that you paid $8.75 for the share. Now the way dividends are allocated to shareholders depends on dates published when the dividend is declared. The day you purchase the share, the day your transaction clears etc are all vital to being paid a particular dividend. Here's a link to the SEC with related information: https://www.sec.gov/answers/dividen.htm I suppose it goes without saying but, historical dividend payments should not be your sole evaluation criteria. Personally, I would be extremely wary of a company paying a 40% dividend ($1 quarterly dividend on a $10 stock), it's very possible that in your example bar corp is a more sound investment. Additionally, this has really nothing to do with P/E (price/earnings) ratios.